Petitioner sought removal of Respondent No.1, appointed executrix, who refused to apply for probate of a Will. Court held a prima facie case for removal existed.
Petitioner's prayer for removal of Respondent No.1 under Section 301 was allowed. Prayer for return of original Will was 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.
11-mpt99-18.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION
MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.99 OF 2018
Chandru B. Kirpalani ...Petitioner V/s. Dr.(Ms.) Maya B. Kirpalani & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.Mehul Shah for the Petitioner. None for the Respondents.
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J. DATE : 9TH JANUARY, 2019.
P.C. :-
1/4
11-mpt99-18.doc
February, 2005 and also the correspondence annexed to the petition. He submits that the petitioner as well as the respondent nos.2 to 5 are the beneficiaries under the said Will. He submits that the respondent no.1 was appointed as a sole executrix of the said Will dated 7th February, 2005.
2/4
11-mpt99-18.doc
2005, the respondent no.1 did not take any steps to seek probate of the last alleged Will dated 7th February, 2005 of the deceased Smt.Devibai Bulchand Kirpalani. Though the petitioner repeatedly called upon the respondent no.1 to file the testamentary petition seeking probate, the respondent no.1 has refused to act as an executrix and to apply for probate on the allegations set out in the letter dated 7th September, 2017. The petitioner has disputed the allegations made by the respondent no.1 in the letter dated 7th September, 2017 by the petitioner's advocate's letter dated 24th January, 2018.
a). The Miscellaneous Petition No.99 of 2018 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Since the respondent no.1 in her letter has already informed the petitioner that she does not possess any original Will of the deceased Smt.Devibai Bulchand Kirpalani dated 7th February, 2005, prayer clause (b) cannot be
3/4
11-mpt99-18.doc
granted by this Court. The petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps to rely upon the photocopy of the said Will in accordance with law and to apply for appropriate reliefs for Letters of Administration of the alleged Will annexed.
b). The petitioner is also directed to convey this order to the other respondents.
(R.D. DHANUKA, J.)
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner has made out a case for removal of the respondent No.1 as executrix under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chandru B. Kirpalani
Dr.(Ms.) Maya B. Kirpalani
Respondents 3 and 4
Respondent 5
R.D. DHANUKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
