In a recent legal development, the High Court delves into the legal intricacies of a will dispute case, setting aside the order on maintaining status quo. The court’s detailed analysis sheds light on the grounds for challenging the validity of the will, the importance of preserving assets, and the criteria for granting temporary injunctions. Stay tuned to understand the nuances of legal proceedings and court decisions in this complex matter.
Facts
- The appellant filed an appeal against the High Court’s order in R/Appeal From Order No 70 of 2022.
- The High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur in Special Civil Suit No.256 of 2021.
- The order directed the defendants to maintain status quo regarding the property mentioned in the Will until final disposal of the suit.
- The defendants were also required to provide details and accounts of the movable property of the deceased-Ishwarbhai Madhavbhai Patel within 30 days of the order.
- The plaintiff sought to set aside the Will dated 28.05.2018, claiming it to be illegal, null and void due to alleged undue influence by Defendant Nos.1 and 2.
- The plaintiff requested a declaration that each party had a 25% undivided share in the assets described in Schedule-A and Schedule-B.
- In response to the written statement filed by the defendants, an affidavit in rejoinder was submitted by the appellant.
- The appellant also applied for an ad-interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 C.P.C. due to fears of alienation of the immovable properties mentioned in the Will.
- Trial court passed an order with specific findings on the three ingredients for grant of temporary injunction
- The three ingredients are prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss
- Specific findings were recorded for each of these ingredients
Also Read: Balancing Private Grievances and Public Interests
Analysis
- Suit at the stage of framing of issues.
- Direction given to account for movable properties of the deceased within 30 days.
- Parties assured cooperation for early disposal of the suit.
- Efforts to give proposal for meeting ends of justice failed as appellant found respondents’ proposal unacceptable.
- Plaint reflects major grounds for assailing the Will dated 28.05.2018 not solely by Ishwarbhai Madhavbhai Patel.
- List provided.
- Respondents are not willing to give an undertaking to not alienate the properties during the suit.
- They offered that some properties would not be alienated, which was not accepted by the appellant.
Also Read: Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Based on Insufficient Allegations
Decision
- The order of status quo passed by the trial court was justified in the circumstances of the case.
- The appeal has been allowed by the High Court, setting aside the impugned order of the trial court.
- The suit itself is directed to be decided on merits preferably within a period of six months.
- Pending applications before the High Court stand disposed of.
- The High Court further directed to expedite the hearing of the suit and ensure its disposal within six months from the date of its order.
Also Read: Reversal of Acquittal: High Court Convicts Accused in Murder Case
Case Title: HARISH ISHWARBHAI PATEL Vs. JATIN ISHWARBHAI PATEL (2022 INSC 1134)
Case Number: C.A. No.-007811-007811 / 2022
