<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1987 (10) TMI 384 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284780</link>
    <description>A female Hindu&#039;s limited estate was enlarged into absolute ownership by Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and a compromise decree that only rendered an earlier gift ineffective did not curtail that enlargement. As absolute owner, she had full testamentary capacity, so the will executed by her was valid. The finding that the will was genuine and duly executed further supported the legatees&#039; title, and the contrary view of the High Court was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2019 18:11:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596843" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (10) TMI 384 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284780</link>
      <description>A female Hindu&#039;s limited estate was enlarged into absolute ownership by Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and a compromise decree that only rendered an earlier gift ineffective did not curtail that enlargement. As absolute owner, she had full testamentary capacity, so the will executed by her was valid. The finding that the will was genuine and duly executed further supported the legatees&#039; title, and the contrary view of the High Court was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>