279 of 2007 as assailed herein.
Consequently, the Letter of Administration as prayed for, by the appellant vis vis the said Will was granted.
A/152 to A/162/1 situated at Sukhdev Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi, bequeathing the same to him.
249/1980 re numbered as PC No.
The judgment and order dated 15 05 2007 passed in P C No.
It was mentioned that the testator expired on 02 08 1980 at Delhi whereafter, Shri Harswaroop Sharma, resident of 41, Subhash Market, Kotla Mubarkpur, informed him to receive the Will lying in his custody.
The High Court on a threadbare evaluation of the pleadings and the evidence on record, on the touchstone of the relevant provisions of the Act and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for short hereinafter referred to as Act 1872 , determined that the Will dated 22 10 1973 had number been proved as per law and that numberProbate or Letter of Administration companyld be granted.
That the Will was executed and made in Delhi was also mentioned.
In the petition, he averred the names and particulars of the sons and daughters of the deceased testator and disclosed further that the subject matter of the Will was located in New Delhi.
Aggrieved, the respondents preferred appeal being FAO 279/2007 in the High Court of Delhi.
807 Private No.
160/2006 , by the District Judge, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, granting Letter of Administration to him, has been reversed by the High Court of Delhi by its judgment and order dated 02 07 2014 rendered in FAO No.
By the impugned judgment and order, as adverted to herein above, the verdict of the learned Trial Court has been reversed.
The appellant stated that the testator nursed great love and affection for him for the services rendered by him and was number favourably disposed towards his sons for their disagreeable companyduct and activities.
It was, thereafter, according to the appellant that the application for Letter of Administration was filed.
Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Daljeet Singh, Senior Advocate for the respondents.
AMITAVA ROY, J. Leave granted.
He stated that the Will had been executed by Mr. Nathu Singh on 22 10 1973, as the sole and absolute owner amongst others of Municipal House Tax No.
A brief outline of the pleaded facts would portray the rival orientations.
We have heard Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr.
The genesis of the lingering dissension in the instant proceeding lies in the Will claimed by the appellant herein to have been executed on 22 10 1973 by Nathu Singh since deceased , the predecessor in the interest of the respondents, thereby bequeathing the property mentioned therein to him appellant .
The appellant, to reiterate, filed an application under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 for short hereinafter referred to as the Act with the Will annexed, seeking grant of Letter of Administration.
