Case Law Details
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – The plea, of the appellants, that Rami Reddy’s family from the second wife and the testator’s family was a composite family and the properties were joint family properties of the plaintiffs and the defendants, has not been accepted by the trial court as well as High Court. We have no justifiable reason to take a different view on this aspect.
Importantly, Rami Reddy during his life time – although he survived for about 19 years after the death of the testator – never claimed any legacy under the subject will. All in all, on the construction of the will and, in the circumstances, it must be held, and we hold that no legacy came to be vested in Rami Reddy and he did not become entitled to any interest in the estate of the testator and, therefore, the plaintiffs did not acquire any right, title or interest in the properties of Bijivemula Subba Reddy. In view of the above, the challenge to the findings of the High Court on the plea of adverse possession set up by the defendants and the genuineness of the will executed by Pitchamma in 1953 pale into significance and needs no consideration.
Siddamurthy Jayarami Reddy (D) by LRs. Vs. Godi Jaya Rami Reddy & ANR
Civil Appeal No. 916 of 2005
Honourable Judge(s): R.M. Lodha, Aftab Alam
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
