Friday, 24, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Surbhi Shory @ Suchitra Sharma & ... vs State & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 2382 Del

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 2382 Del
Judgement Date : 12 May, 2017

Delhi High Court
Surbhi Shory @ Suchitra Sharma & ... vs State & Ors on 12 May, 2017
    $~35
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+   FAO 217/2017 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 17976/2017 (for stay) and
    17977/2017 (for condonation of delay of 233 days in filing the
    appeal)

    SURBHI SHORY @ SUCHITRA SHARMA & ANR ..... Appellants
                 Through: Mr. Kartik Khanna and Mr. Prashant
                          Sharma, Advocates.

                        versus

    STATE & ORS                                           ..... Respondents

    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

                        ORDER

% 12.05.2017

C.M. Appl. No. 17978/2017 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of.

FAO 217/2017

1. This first appeal under Section 299 of the Indian

Succession Act, 1925 is filed by the petitioners in the probate petition,

dismissing the probate case with respect to the Will dated 22.8.2007

of the deceased Sh. Bal Kishan Singhal. Admittedly, petitioners are

FAO 217/2017 page 1 of 2 not the natural legal heirs of the deceased Sh. Bal Kishan Singhal and

whose natural legal heirs were the respondents in the petition and who

propounded another Will dated 10.12.2010.

2. Paragraph 6 of the judgment of the court below records

that petitioner was given repeated opportunities for over a long period

of three years to complete petitioners evidence, but petitioner did not

lead evidence. The only evidence of witness-PW1, and who was the

petitioner no. 1, was recorded in chief but thereafter she did not

appear for completing her cross-examination, and hence such

evidence could also not be looked into. Once, there was no evidence

on record on behalf of the petitioners in support of the Will dated

22.8.2007, and evidence was rightly closed, hence I do not find any

illegality in the judgment of the court below dismissing the petition

for probate/Letters of Administration.

3. Dismissed.



                                                VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
       MAY 12, 2017
       AK

FAO 217/2017                                                 page 2 of 2
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter