Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Succession Act, 1925

6 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

N.P. SASEENDRANversusN.P. PONNAMMA & ORS.

2025 INSC 38824 March 2025Dismissed

The appellant (son) challenged a decree of the Kerala High Court that declared a 1985 deed executed by his father in favour of his sister (plaintiff) to be a settlement and a valid gift, thereby invalidating a later cancellation deed and sale deed dated 19.10.1993. The core issue was whether the 1985 instrument was a g

GURDIAL SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRversusJAGIR KAUR (DEAD) AND ANR. ETC.

2025 INSC 86617 July 2025Dismissed

Maya Singh died leaving a registered Will dated 16 May 1991 that bequeathed his 67-kanal land to his nephew, Gurdial Singh, while omitting any reference to his wife, Jagir Kaur, and providing no reason for her disinheritance. The nephew sued to enforce the Will, and the wife filed a separate suit claiming she was the l

C.P. FRANCISversusC.P. JOSEPH AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 10713 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the succession to the suit‑schedule property of the deceased parents, C.R. Pius and Philomina Pius, who had executed a joint will bequeathing the property to the appellant C.P. Francis. The respondents, other children of the deceased, challenged the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capa

RAMESH CHAND (D) THR. LRS.versusSURESH CHAND AND ANR.

2025 INSC 10591 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff claimed title to a Delhi property on the basis of an agreement to sell, a general power of attorney, a receipt of consideration, an affidavit and a registered will executed by his father, Kundan Lal. The trial court and High Court had upheld his claim, but the Supreme Court examined whether these document

VINAYAK PURSHOTTAM DUBE (DECEASED), THROUGH LRS.versusJAYASHREE PADAMKAR BHAT & OTHERS

2024 INSC 1591 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents filed a consumer complaint alleging that the sole proprietor developer failed to complete construction and pay dues under a 1996 Development Agreement. The developer died during the pendency of the case, and the legal representatives were directed by the NCDRC to both pay monetary amounts and to perform

GOPAL KRISHAN & ORS.versusDAULAT RAM & ORS.

2025 INSC 181 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Gopal Krishan claimed title to a one‑quarter share of land in Gurdaspur based on a Will executed by the deceased Sanjhi Ram on 7 November 2005, which was subsequently transferred and sold. The respondents challenged the Will, alleging it was forged and that the attesting witness had not testified that the

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search