Judgment · High Court · 2025
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner submitted that name of the Statue is incorrectly mentioned in the paragraph No. 5 of the order dated 09.10.2025, instead of “the Indian Succession Act, 1925.” Hence, same is corrected and read as “the Indian Succession Act, 1925” instead…
Judgment
P. C. : Shri. Anand Tiwari i/b Rajesh Narang Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner
Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner submitted that name of the Statue is incorrectly mentioned in the paragraph No. 5 of the order dated 09.10.2025, instead of “the Indian Succession Act, 1925.” Hence, same is corrected and read as “the Indian Succession Act, 1925” instead of ‘the Hindu Succession Act, 1956”. He submitted that in paragraph No.1 word ‘beneficiary’ may be substituted by word “Legatee”. Submission is accepted and word is corrected accordingly. Furthermore, in para no. 7 of the said order spelling of non-availability is also corrected.
It is made clear that rest of the order dated
09.10.2025 will remain as it is.
Removed from the board.
03.11.2025 with Testamentary Department Officer on Special Duty,
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Succession Act, 1925; Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 03 Nov 2025.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.