SC ignores Registered will of husband in favor of wife. Conflicting order passed

[Sushila Suri]

1969 to 1996:- Sri G.R. Suri family(wife+5 children) lived together until the youngest son upon becoming a doctor in 1991 and after marriage in 1990 started fights with parents and elder brother in family thereby creating rifts and differences.

Father Sri G.R.Suri made huge investments out of his own earnings in 1989-90 towards contributing for a hospital for his Dr.son who completed his MD Medicine in 1992.
1995:- Lt. G.R.Suri instructed younger son Dr. Sushil Suri to make seperate living thru the Hospital made by lt. G.R. Suri inaugrated/opened in 1992.

1996 to till date Dr. Suri living in seperate house due to bad behaviour and foul playing with his parents and elder brother Harish Suri who lived with mother and father in joint family and in joined business with father.

11.6.2004:- Lt. G.R.Suri registers his first and last will in favor of his wife smt.Sushila Suri.
24.10.2011:- Lt. G.R.Suri passed away.
Oct.2012 – younger son Dr. Sushil Suri files an injunction suit against his mother claiming his 1/6th share alleging the duly registered will of his belated father as fraud and fictious.
The said registered will is no where in challenge till date despite knowledge of the same to Dr. SURI in courts records in oct 2012.

Later after several proceedings in trial court. HC orders trial court for an immediate cross examination of smt. Sushila suri statements prior to framing of issues due to her old age and illness.

FEB 2016:- Cross examination of Smt sushila suri concluded by Trial court after 15months from order of HC for first evidence of Smt sushila suri.

Dec 2013. First Stay granted to Dr.sushil suri on consent of Smt sushila suri that she will not make third party rights during pendency of suit.

Feb 2016:- Dr. Sushil suri files a fresh suit for partition and injunction on same properties despite earlier temp injunction still in existence and gets ex party injunction on first day and confirmed in august 2015.
August 2016 – HC dismisses the second suit stay primarily on the ground that in absence of suit of cancellation of registered will dr. Suri cannot succeed to his share of being a legatee son as no declaration of his title to the property is given by any competent court.

SEP 2016. SC disposes off the SLP filed by appeallant Dr. SUSHIL SURI AGAINST his mother Smt. Sushila Suri in favor of Dr. Sushil Suri thereby completely ignoring the registered will dated 11.6.2004 in favor of Smt. Sushila Suri by her belated husband. SC also ordered the HC order as inaffective and inoperative for trial on merits.

Till date trial court proceedings being conducted.

Q1. SC DENIES JUSTICE TO Smt. Sushila Suri (mother) despite good merits of case of Smt. Sushila Suri.

JUSTICE J.S.Khaher in the division bench passed the judgement and the I.A. later filed by Smt. SUSHILA Suri also got dismissed by the same bench.

Now, Whats the remedy for us??? Can we get any relief from anywhere… can we go for a review or a curative petition filed.

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW BENCH CASE NO. Fafo 828/2015
SLP disposed off on 16-09-2016.
IA filed by smt. Sushila Suri dismissed on 17-10-16.

[Sushila Suri]

Comprehensive action plan for providing protection of life and property of seniors citizen parent under susbection 2 of section 22 of parent welfare act 2007 also not considered by SC in the case.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

You can try the review petition if you are aggrieved by the order in the SLP if you feel that there is an error apparent on record. If a review petition is dismissed, then only curative petition can be considered. However, be aware that chances of success in review petition and curative petition are generally much less.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Sushila Suri]

On the day the First SLP of dr. Sushil suri was listed for arguments on calling the case advocate Parag tripathi appeared and argued but in minutes the court made an observation that the order pass by High court is correct and SLP be dismissed upon which Sri tripathi requested the court that Dr. A.M. Singhvi is also engaged for the matter and that he shall argue the case post lunch. Case called at 2pm. Dr. Singhvi appeared and argued. the court after listening to both parties ordered( by reading and dictation) to the record incharge….

”that the first injunction suit stay given by consent shall continue and the parties shall be bound by the final outcome of the two suits and also if any construction is made in mean time during the pendency of suit no claim shall be made later by such person making the said construction.”
The high court order of Fafo no 828 of 2015 dtd. 13.8.16 shall not stand in any way of the trial court to decide the case on merits”.
With the above observations and dictation given in SC bench we were staisfied with Justice given.

But the order did not came out in stipulated time and got delayed…

Later after few days when the order sheet of SLP was checked it was found that the date of stay granted ex. Party on 12.2.15 and confirmed on 23.8.15 of trial court for partition suit was mentioned in the order instead of 23.12.13 date of order on which temporary injunction was passed in the first suit for permanent injunction.

It is also relevant here that the trial court orders on date 12.2.15 and 23.8.15 relates to stay of construction in the second suit for partition whereas the first suit for permanent injunction stay was granted on 23.12.13 and not on 23.8.15 which is the date of stay in partition suit which is clearly indicating that the dates mentioned in SC SLP judgement has been delivered with the dates mistake where the date was supposed to be 23.12.13 which was printed as 23.8.15 the order of which date has already been quashed by the HC Fafo no 828/2015.

So now my question is that:-
1. Whether without quashing/ setting aside of the High Court order and also without recording restoration of the order passed by trial court how can both the orders sustain when the later order is an appeal allowed from the first order.
2. Also when the order dtd 23.8.15 for stay on properties restraining constructions is continued how can constructions be raised which the court says in the order that in the mean time if constructions are made it would not be claimed later after final outcome of both the suits on merits.

The judgement passed by J.S. khaher is confusing and contrary to law which needs to be amended and the IA of which later filed by Smt. Sushila Suri also got dismissed by same bench on 17.10.16 saying that the order passed on 16.9.16 is correct and needs no correction.

3. It seemed that the arguments of dr. Singhvi in the court room did not work good on the same day when the judgement was passed and SLP disposed off as above explained but when the order was seen then it was the other way round to the benefit of Dr.Suri. this shows that the connection of a SC judge with Dr. Singhvi matters more than principles of law and justice. As the dismissal of IA on 17.10.16 establishes that the link and connection between dr. Singhvi and the bench which is looking influenced and as strongly biased.

Does Only connections and names of such expensive lawyers in top 10 list do work in supreme court or does any law and order is also looked upon or completely ignored as done in our case.

SENIOR ADVOCATE:- RETD. JUSTICE PRADEEP KANT appearing on behalf of Smt. Sushila Suri was completely ignored by SC and no weightage to the caee was given by SC despite the case being very strong on merits and not considered by.
The court did not even see the cruelness of son litigating against her 85 yrs old real mother against the wish of his father as instructed in his last registered will dtd 11.6.04.

Does the only top 10 named list of SC lawyers can only get justice and any other senior advocate in the lower heirarchy cud be ignored as seen above in our case.

The judicial system seems to be absolutely unreliable and justice to any other advocate/client cud be difficult to be delivered even though when on merits the case was also very strong.

[Sushila Suri]

How can i circulate such material before reveiw petiton/ curative petition is filed so that if the matter is highlited then it might be that the bench cud not ignore the petition completely like already done twice as mentioned above.
Shud i report the matter to Media for injustice by SC.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

It is not advisable to go to media before review petition, etc.

Secondly, it is not possible to comment on facts of the case unless one goes through detailed papers.

Thirdly, when you already have senior counsel (such as a retired Judge of High Court on your side) appearing in the case, why don’t take their advice, since only a person who has seen the papers would be in a position to comment in detail on facts. Closing this question.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts