Disposed

Suhasini Sukhdeo Kanade v. Mugdha Mangesh Pangam and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Sept 2014WP/2250/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the Administrator General's grant of certificate under Section 29 of the Administrative General Act, 1963, regarding succession via Will. The Court held that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy through the High Court's testamentary jurisdiction for Letters of Probate under Sections 6 and 22 of the Act. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without all

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of; the petitioner directed to approach the High Court under its testamentary jurisdiction.

Suhasini Sukhdeo Kanade Vs Mugdha Mangesh Pangam… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2014)

(Wp 2250 of 2011)

vat

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION No. 2250 OF 2011

¶6

Suhasini Sikhdeo Kanade ...Petitioner Vs. Mugdha Mangesh Pangam ...Respondents

¶7

¶8

Mr. Chandrakant Chavan for Petitioner Mr.Ramesh Cheulkar for Respondent No.1 Mr. D.A. Nalavade -Government Pleader for Respondent No.2 ***********

¶9

CORAM : V. M. KANADE , & P.D. KODE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 2014

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner.

¶13

The Petitioner is aggrieved by grant of certificate by the Administrator General under the provisions of the Administrative General Act, 1963. Respondent No.1 filed an application seeking certificate under section 29 of the said Act on the basis of the Will. The Administrator, after satisfying himself about the genuineness of the claim of Respondent No.1, granted certificate. The Petitioner, thereafter, applied for revocation of the certificate under section 33 of the Administrative General Act, 1963. However, the said application for revocation has been rejected. The Petitioner, therefore, approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

1/2

- 2 -

(Wp 2250 of 2011)

In our view, the Petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of approaching the High Court through its Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction for Letters of Probate. Section 22 of the Administrative General Act clearly mentions the effect of the certificate which has been issued by the Learned Administrator General. As a result of the said certificate, which has been issued, the holder of the certificate has the same powers and duties which can be exercised after the Letters of Administration is granted to him. Section 6 of the said Act in terms states that this shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the High Court for grant of probate or Letters of Administration. The Petitioner, therefore, has an alternate remedy of filing an appropriate application under the Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction of this Court or any other remedy which is available to him under law. Reserving the said right of the Petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶18

Vaishali Tikam

¶19

2/2

Suhasini Sukhdeo Kanade v. Mugdha Mangesh Pangam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suhasini Sukhdeo Kanade v. Mugdha Mangesh Pangam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gowardhan Jagannath Chavarepatil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Seema Dattatraya Phuge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Satish Ram Son of Shankar Ram Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shashikant Raghunath Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharat C. Somani and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mukul Suryakan Gujar Vs the Cheif Election Commissioner and 3 Others