<?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>2001 (2) TMI 1050 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290649</link>
    <description>Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 requires probate or letters of administration before a right as executor or legatee can be established in court, subject to the exclusions in Section 213(2) and the territorial classifications in Section 57. The provision is not confined to Christians; it applies differently to various communities and territories, including certain Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jaina and Parsi wills. That historical and territorially based differentiation has a rational nexus with testamentary proof and does not, by itself, amount to unconstitutional discrimination. The challenge to the validity of Section 213 therefore fails.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 09:42:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=624488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 1050 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290649</link>
      <description>Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 requires probate or letters of administration before a right as executor or legatee can be established in court, subject to the exclusions in Section 213(2) and the territorial classifications in Section 57. The provision is not confined to Christians; it applies differently to various communities and territories, including certain Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jaina and Parsi wills. That historical and territorially based differentiation has a rational nexus with testamentary proof and does not, by itself, amount to unconstitutional discrimination. The challenge to the validity of Section 213 therefore fails.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290649</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>