Last Will may prevail over earlier Will:-

-
  Last Will may prevail over earlier Will:- In case of dispute between earlier and subsequent parts of a Will,the subsequent part of the Will will prevails ( Kaivelikkal Ambunhi & ors vs H.Ganesh Bhandary,(1995) 5 SCC-444 & Uma Devi Nambiar & ors vs TC Sidhan,( 2004) 2 SCC-321. In case of “ Jasbir Singh vs Jaspal Singh & ors ”,2016 SCC Online P & H-3416,it   was held that the last will would prevail and the previous Will automatically deemed to have been cancelled, even in the absence of any specific clause.
Post a Comment

Fraudulent withdrawal of Money by Postman from Post Office and Punishment:-

-

 Fraudulent withdrawal of Money by Postman from Post Office and Punishment:-


The facts leading to this matter (Union of India & ors vs M.Duraisamy) reported in (2022) 7 SCC-475) in a nutshell are as under:

That a Postal Assistant,(here respondent),while he was working as SPM Veppur SO during the period from 2004 to 2007, he committed fraud by way of fraudulent withdrawal in 85 RD accounts and by way of non-credit of deposits in 71 RD accounts and defrauded a sum of Rs.16,59,065/-. The fraud came to light when enquiries were made based on the report of Postmaster, Srirangam vide letter dated 11.06.2007 about double payment of RD closure in respect of some RD accounts which revealed that the accounts were fraudulently closed by the respondent herein for the second time by way of forging the signatures of the depositors and a sum of Rs.52,395/- had been withdrawn from the said accounts by the respondent fraudulently. Further investigation brought to light the frauds committed by the respondent herein. Thereafter having come to know that the fraud has been detected, the respondent herein deposited a total sum of Rs.18,09,041/- (the amount of fraud Rs. 16,66,439/- + penal interest of Rs.1,42,602/-).

A departmental enquiry was initiated against the respondent vide office memorandum dated 26.07.2010. Six charges were framed against the respondent. The respondent admitted the fraud in his defence representation. An Inquiry Officer was appointed. The Inquiry Officer held all the charges proved against the respondent – delinquent, as the delinquent officer himself admitted all the charges in the preliminary sitting itself. The Inquiry Officer’s report was forwarded to the charged official. The charged official submitted his representation on the Inquiry Officer’s report. Thereafter the Disciplinary Authority imposed the penalty of ‘removal’ from service vide memo dated 19.01.2011, having found that the offence committed by the charged official – respondent herein was grave in nature and retention of such person in the department would further hamper the services rendered to the public. The departmental appeal against the order of removal from service came to be dismissed.

 




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Applicability of CPC & Limitation Act in Writ Proceedings:-

-
  Applicability of CPC & Limitation Act in Writ Proceedings:-   The issue concerning applicability of the provisions of the CPC in the writ proceedings is no longer res integra in view clear pronouncement made by the Supreme Court in “ Puran Singh and Others v State of Punjab and Others” reported in (1996) 2 SCC-205 , wherein the Supreme Court was dealing with an issue as to whether the provisions contained under Order 22 of the CPC are applicable to proceedings under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. The question as to whether provisions of the Act, 1963 would apply in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is also no longer res integra in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in “Smt. Sudama Devi v Commissioner and others ” reported in (1983) 2 SCC-1.  
Read more

Guarantor has the liability to pay the loan amount taken by the principal debotor:-

-
  Guarantor has the liability to pay the loan amount taken by the principal debotor:- Recovery of debt from guarantor-Held, guarantee being a continuing guarantee,so long as the principal debt remained due and payable,the guarantor also remained liable-The suit was therefore not barred by limitation-However,liability of guarantor cannot exceed that of the principal debtor,even thought he guarantee documents mentioned so,since guarantor is only guaranteeing debt due by the principal debtor-Principal debtor being liable to pay interest 13.5% in respect of term loan facility   and 14% p.a. in respect of cash credit facility (B.G.Vasantha vs Corporation Bank<amangalore & anr,(2005) 10 SCC-215.                            Liability of guarantor is co-extensive with that of principal debtor unless it is explicitly exluded by the contract-Further held,...
Read more

Inheritance and Survivorship:-

-
  Inheritance and Survivorship:-                         ‘Mulla’ in his book Hindu Law (22nd Edition), while discussing the law prior to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 says that there are two systems of inheritance amongst the Hindus in India, namely, Mitakshara system and Dayabhaga system. The Dayabhaga system prevails in Bengal, while the Mitakshara system is applicable to other parts of India. The difference between the two systems arises from the fact that, while the doctrine of religious efficacy is the guiding principle under Dayabhaga School, there is no such definite guiding principle under the Mitakshara School. Sometimes consanguinity, and at the other times, religious efficacy has been regarded as the guiding principle. According to ‘Mulla’, Mitakshara recognises two modes of devolution of property, namely, survivorship and succession. The rules of survivo...
Read more