Mr. Louis Bent v. Mrs. Brenda D'Lima
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge disposed of a chamber summons as misconceived because the caveat period was not expired, holding no directions were necessary at this stage.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.6 OF 2009 IN TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 85 OF 2008 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.862 OF 2008
Louis Bent
.. Deceased
Mrs.Brenda D Lima
.. Petitioner/plaintiff
Mr.Rita Yadav i/b. Gaurang Mehta for petitioner
CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE : 30th September 2009.
P.C.:
1] It is stated that this chamber summons is placed for direction. Petitioner’s Advocate has issued the necessary citation but the period for filing caveat has yet to expire. In my view, if the caveat and affidavit in support of the same are filed, only then, the office is obliged to treat the petition as contested matter or else the petitioner can apply for grant of probate in his favour. There is no necessity of issuing any directions at this stage. The chamber summons is misconceived and is disposed of.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Louis Bent
Coram
S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court