Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (10) TMI 335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the case of Will made by Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jain, where such Wills are of the class specified in Clause (a) and (b) or Section 57 of Indian Succession Act. Territorial Jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- Decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court upon which the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner placed reliance is considered, and it is found that Hon'ble Madras High Court in a case P. Ranganathan and Others Vs. Sai Jagannathan and Others [ 1995 (8) TMI 339 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] considered the territorial jurisdiction of Saidapet and held that the property situated in Saidapet is outside the original territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court - in the light of that decision when we shall consider the case in hand .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a, Member (J) 1. The applicant filed an application praying therein to direct the Respondent's Company to issue a share certificate. 2. We have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant and in course of his hearing, a preliminary question was framed. 3. Since the Petitioner's claim is based on the purchase made by the legal heir of the deceased in whose favour the Will was executed by the deceased, therefore, before considering the main issue, we would like to decide first, Whether a person can transfer any interest on the basis of Will or not ? 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant in course of his argument submitted that the Will was executed at the residence of the executor at 81 v.s. Mudali stre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ight of submissions raised on behalf of the Petitioner, we have gone through the decision referred by the Petitioner as well as the provisions under the Indian Succession Act. 9. Before considering the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner, we would like to refer the Section 57 and Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act and same are quoted below: - Section 57: - Application of certain provisions of Part to a class of wills made by Hindus, etc. -The provisions of this Part which are set out in Schedule III shall, subject to the restrictions and modifications specified therein, apply-- (a) to all wills and codicils made by any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina, on or after the first day of September, 1870, within the t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alcutta, Madras and Bombay, and where such wills are made outside those limits, in so far as they relate to immovable property situate within those limits. Mere plain reading of the aforesaid provisions shows that Section 213(1) of Indian Succession Act says that no right as executor or legatee can be established in any court of justice unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in India has granted probate of the Will under which the right is claimed, but sub-section 2 of the Section 213 says that this section is not applicable in case of a Will made by the Mohammadans and shall applicable only in the case of Will made by Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jain, where such Wills are of the class specified in Clause (a) and (b) or Section 57 of In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e case in hand then we find that the Will, which the Petitioner has enclosed at page 57 to 59 of the paper book was executed at 81 V.S. Mudali Street, Saidapet, Madras. 13. At this juncture, we would also like to refer the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court upon which the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner placed reliance and we find that Hon'ble Madras High Court in a case P. Ranganathan and Others Vs. Sai Jagannathan and Others reported in (1995) 2 CTC 181 considered the territorial jurisdiction of Saidapet and held that the property situated in Saidapet is outside the original territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court. 14. Now in the light of that decision when we shall consider the case in hand the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates