A Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court of India concerned a family estate dispute worth over ₹41,000 crore, arising from a rejected maintenance claim. The Court examined whether a widow daughter-in-law who becomes a widow after the death of her father-in-law can claim maintenance from his estate under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Upholding the High Court, the Supreme Court ruled that Section 21 includes any widow of a son as a dependant, regardless of timing. A widow unable to maintain herself is entitled to maintenance……
High Stake Property/Estate Disputes
High Stake Family Estate Disputes in India, Estate Dispute Lawyers
Services We Offer
Estate Structuring and Succession Planning
Will and Trust Disputes
Family Settlement and Partition matters
Articles & Quotes
Satula Devi was represented in the high court by Senior Advocate Vikas Singh and and a team from Foresight Law […]
“The law expects the will should state clear reasons for excluding a legal heir. If no reasons are provided, it […]
The NDTV Profit article discusses how the Enemy Property Act, especially after its 2017 amendment, has led to contentious outcomes […]
Key Deals & Landmark Matters in High Stake Property/Estate Disputes
TUV SUD South Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bureau of Indian Standards
TUV SUD South Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bureau of Indian Standards
A petition before the Delhi High Court concerned the guardianship of a senior public figure suffering from severe dementia, involving family assets exceeding ₹41,000 crore. Serious concerns were raised regarding control over his person and property, lack of transparency, and potential misuse of assets, prompting the Court to intervene for independent supervision to safeguard his welfare and estate.
TUV SUD South Asia Pvt. Ltd. vs. Bureau of Indian Standards
Ms. Priya Monga, through her power of attorney holder, filed a detailed representation before the Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana, seeking cancellation of License No. LC-223 granted for development of “Sushant Lok-III,” Sector-57, Gurugram. The challenge was based on fraudulent misrepresentation and defective title, as the developers concealed settled ownership disputes despite final civil court decrees and dismissal of their SLP by the Supreme Court.