SUNIL GUPTA versus KIRAN GIRHOTRA AND ORS.

SUNIL GUPTA versus KIRAN GIRHOTRA AND ORS.

A purchaser or transferee of property belonging to a testator during the pendency of probate proceedings is not a necessary party and is not entitled to be impleaded in such proceedings. The risk of outcome in such probate proceedings falls upon such transferee.

Parties
Appellant: Sunil Gupta; Respondents: Kiran Girhotra and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of the High Court of Delhi
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Probate Proceedings, Impleadment of Parties, Transferee Pendent Lite, Necessary Party
Succession Civil Procedure Probate Proceedings Impleadment of Parties Transferee Pendent Lite Necessary Party

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunil Gupta

Appellant

Kiran Girhotra and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of the High Court of Delhi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a purchaser of property belonging to a testator is a necessary party in probate proceedings
  2. 2 Whether a transferee pendent lite is entitled to be impleaded in probate proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

A purchaser or transferee of property belonging to a testator during the pendency of probate proceedings is not a necessary party and is not entitled to be impleaded in such proceedings. The risk of outcome in such probate proceedings falls upon such transferee.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appellant not entitled to be impleaded in the probate proceedings.
  • No orders necessary to be passed in the contempt petition.