BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS. versus BALKRISHAN D. SANGHVI & ORS.

BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS. versus BALKRISHAN D. SANGHVI & ORS.

Persons involved in transactions relevant to the estate may be necessary parties to an administration suit, as the Court must determine the assets of the estate at the date of death, including scrutiny of such transactions. The High Court did not err in allowing amendments to the plaint to implead the appellants.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Babulal Khandelwal & Ors.; Respondent: Balkrishan D. Sanghvi & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Administration Suit, Estate of Deceased, Intestate Succession, Impleadment of Parties, Amendment of Plaint
Civil Procedure Administration Suit Estate of Deceased Intestate Succession Impleadment of Parties Amendment of Plaint

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Babulal Khandelwal & Ors.

Appellant

Balkrishan D. Sanghvi & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether transactions entered into by deceased with appellants during their lifetime can be questioned in an administration suit filed by respondent for administration of the estate
  2. 2 Whether High Court erred in allowing amendment to the plaint thereby impleading appellants as parties to the administration suit

Ratio Decidendi

Persons involved in transactions relevant to the estate may be necessary parties to an administration suit, as the Court must determine the assets of the estate at the date of death, including scrutiny of such transactions. The High Court did not err in allowing amendments to the plaint to implead the appellants.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the High Court allowing amendments to the plaint for impleading the appellants as parties to the administration suit affirmed.
  • Respondent No. 1 permitted to question transactions entered into by owners of the estate with third parties.