#will dispute

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that courts cannot grant interim injunctions under Order 39 CPC when the plaintiff has not sought a perpetual injunction, as this violates the mandatory linkage between temporary and permanent relief under Sections 38 and 41 of the Specific Relief Act. This clarifies a critical procedural limit for property and succession disputes, preventing appellate courts from circumventing substantive pleading requirements through status quo orders.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that courts must direct disputed wills to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory in Hyderabad for handwriting analysis, rejecting referrals to private forensic labs. This establishes a binding standard for judicial fairness in testamentary disputes, ensuring uniformity, credibility, and procedural integrity in forensic authentication across civil litigation.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that a counter-claim cannot be maintained against co-defendants in a joint property dispute, emphasizing procedural fairness under the CPC. The case is remanded for fresh determination of maintainability, affecting litigants contesting co-defendant claims in will disputes.

Madhya Pradesh High Court reaffirms that revenue authorities (Tehsildars) cannot adjudicate disputes over the validity of wills under MP Land Revenue Code. Such matters must be referred to civil courts, ensuring judicial oversight in property mutation disputes involving contested testamentary documents.