Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

When Will Silent On A Part Of Property That Should Be Treated As Intestate Property: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a latest decision, the Delhi High Court has set a significant precedent in the interpretation of wills and partition of properties. The court, presided over by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, ruled in favor of equal partition of a disputed barsati room and terrace, located atop the first floor of property C-316 in Defence Colony, New Delhi.

The dispute revolved around the interpretation of a will concerning the partition of property between Santosh Bhasin, the appellant, and the legal representatives (LRs) of late Umari Malhotra, the respondents. The original judgment deemed the suit time-barred but proceeded to the merits, interpreting the will to include the barsati room and terrace in the bequest to the defendant/respondents. However, the High Court overturned this decision.

Justice Bhambhani’s observation was pivotal: “The barsati room/terrace would go by intestacy equally to the appellant and the defendant/respondents.” This statement underscored the court’s interpretation that since the will was silent about the barsati room and terrace, these parts of the property should be treated as intestate property.

The court's decision hinged on the critical understanding that the will, while bequeathing the ground floor, motor garage, and first floor servants’ quarters to the appellant and the first floor to the defendant/respondents, did not mention the barsati room or the terrace. Consequently, the court ruled that these areas should be divided equally between the parties as intestate property.

In his judgment, Justice Bhambhani highlighted the importance of interpreting wills in a manner that reflects common sense and practical realities: “It is inconceivable that the testator would have thought that the construction upon the land would remain as-it-was during his lifetime, for all times to come.” This observation reflects the court’s rejection of any counter-intuitive interpretations of the will.

Date of Decision: 10 January 2024

SANTOSH BHASIN VS UMARI MALHOTRA DECD THR LRS

 

Latest Legal News