The Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition after recording the respondent’s submission that no amicable settlement could be reached between the parties, holding that the limited purpose for which notice was issued stood exhausted.
The case arose from a 2012 probate dispute concerning a Will executed by a deceased in respect of property in Aizawl. The trial court had dismissed the probate application as not maintainable, citing non-compliance with provisions of the Mizo District (Inheritance of Property) Act, 1956, and questioning aspects such as execution and applicability of law, despite evidence from attesting witnesses supporting the Will.
On appeal, the High Court held that the relevant law applicable at the time of adjudication was the Mizo Marriage, Divorce and Inheritance of Property Act, 2014, and the trial court erred in relying on the 1956 statute. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court’s judgment, and granted probate of the Will. The aggrieved party filled SLP against this order of the High Court in the Supreme Court.
When the SLP came up for hearing, the Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh recorded that “we had issued a limited notice only to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement.” However, counsel for the respondent submitted that “there is no possibility of settlement by way of mediation between the parties.”
In view of this, the Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition and disposed of all pending applications.
Appearances
Petitioners- Mr. Jitendra Bharti, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel, AOR Ms. Alka Goyal, Adv. Ms. Nandita Sharma, Adv. Ms. Pankhuri Tiwari, Adv.
Respondent- Mr. Rajesh Singh, AOR Ms. Raavi Birbal, Adv. Mr. Arthur Sailo, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anupam Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Singh Aor, Adv.
