Petition for revocation of Letters of Administration dismissed. Court held petitioner has no right to challenge Will on title grounds; remedy for competing title is a substantive suit. All contentions kept open.
Petition for revocation of Letters of Administration dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
25-MPT109-14.DOC
agk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 109 OF 2014
M/s. Madhav Kutir CHS Limited…Petitioners
Versus
Ms. Meena C. Somaiya…Respondent
Mr. P.K. Pandey, i/b Clayderman Co., for the Petitioner.
Mr. Domesh Prakash Guchiya, for the Respondent.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 19th January 2015
PC:-
1.The Petition seeks revocation of the grant dated 28th
February 2014 of Letters of Administration with Will annexed. The
Will in respect of which Letters of Administration were granted was
that of one Smt. Saundaryawati Bahuji Bagrodi alias Manorama.
The Respondents to this Petition were the original Petitioners. The
Will was said to have been executed in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh on
17th July 1987. It purported to make a disposition of immovable
property in Mumbai.
2.The Petition was brought by the Respondent as a the
Constituted Attorney of the legatees under the Will. One of the
1 of 3
25-MPT109-14.DOC
properties mentioned in the Will is Plot No. 3, Survey No. 92,
Hissa No. 3, CTS No. 488 situated at Village Kirol, Off. 7th Road,
Rajawadi, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai – 400 077. The Will
acknowledges that there is a three-storey building standing on that
plot. By her Will, the deceased made a bequest of this property to
the Shri Gopal Lal Trust, one that she had apparently settled in her
lifetime. The Respondents to this Petition were the Trustees of that
Trust. They made an application for Letters of Administration
through their Constituted Attorney.
3.The present Petitioner seeking revocation claims that the
property has been disposed of by the deceased in her lifetime. A
Cooperative Society, namely, the Petitioner, had already come into
existence as far back as in the year 1987. It appears that based inter
alia on the Letters of Administration the Trustees of Sri Gopal Lal
Trust have attempted to change the land records to show their
names as owners of this property. In addition, there appears to have
been a litigation filed before the Additional District Judge, Mathura
in the form of a money suit which was decreed and which decree
was then put into execution against this very property.
4.This Petition is, unfortunately, completely misconceived.
The revocation Petitioner, the Society in question, has no
caveatable interest whatsoever in the estate of the deceased. It may
have title to the property in question, but it is in no position to
dispute the Will of the deceased. It is well-settled that the
testamentary Court does not decide the question of title and the
issuance of Letters of Administration with Will annexed does not
confer on the Respondents any title that the testatrix did not have.
2 of 3
25-MPT109-14.DOC
It is always open to the Petitioner to file a substantive Suit on title
and seek suitable reliefs against the Respondents. The Petitioner
cannot, however, on the basis that it has a competing title to the
property seek to set aside the grant of Letters of Administration in
this fashion.
5.The revocation Petition is not an appropriate remedy for the
Petitioner. The revocation Petition is dismissed. There will be no
order as to costs.
6.All contentions of the Petitioners are expressly kept open,
including specifically that the deceased had disposed of all her
right, title and interest in the property during her lifetime and that
she did not have any valid title left in her to pass by testamentary
bequest to any of the Respondents or to the Trust of which they are
Trustees.
7.It is not out of place to mention that the Respondents are
residents of neighbourhood plot. They appear to be residing on the
neighbouring plot.
8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(G. S. PATEL, J.)
3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner with a competing title to property can seek revocation of a grant of Letters of Administration based on that title.
Whether the testamentary court has jurisdiction to decide questions of title in proceedings for revocation of Letters of Administration.
M/s. Madhav Kutir CHS Limited
Ms. Meena C. Somaiya
G.S. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court