Allowed

Lakhimchand Doulatram Matreja v. Hassan Doulatram Matreja (Deceased)

Bombay HC13 Dec 2022IA/3561/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an interim application to amend the schedule of a testamentary petition to include bank locker property discovered later due to the applicant's age and ignorance of the deceased brother's assets.

What did the court decide?

Amendment to the schedule of the Testamentary Petition to include the bank locker property and extension of the Letter of Administration.

Lakhimchand Doulatram Matreja Vs Hassan Doulatram… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA M M PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2022.12.14 17:35:03 +0530

¶2

1 27-IA 3561-22 in TP 19-21.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3561 OF 2022

¶4

¶5

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.19 OF 2021

¶6

Lakhmichand Doulatram Matreja	… Applicant
In the matter between :
Hassanand Doulatram Matreja	… Deceased
Lakhmichand Doulatram Matreja	… Petitioner

¶7

Mr. Kashyap Padia for the Applicant/Petitioner.

¶8

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 13TH DECEMBER 2022

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

The present Interim Application has been filed seeking an amendment to the Schedule annexed to the Testamentary Petition No.19 of 2021. The Letter of Administration had been granted to the Applicant by an order dated 09/04/2021.

¶11

It is stated that the deceased was a bachelor and brother of the Applicant. It is further stated that the deceased was staying alone and, therefore, the Applicant did not know the actual extent of the properties owned by his

¶12

Mugdha

¶13

1 of 2

¶14

2 27-IA 3561-22 in TP 19-21.doc

¶15

deceased brother. The Interim Application sets out that the Applicant is also 94 years old and due to age related factor, failed and neglected to submit the details of some property. The Applicant has, thus, recently became aware of a bank locker bearing No.1032 with State Bank of India, Andheri East Branch, Mumbai, Maharashtra, which stands in the name of the deceased. Therefore, for the aforesaid reason, the present Interim Application for amendment has been taken out.

¶16

I have heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant, perused the Interim Application and find that the same is in order. The Interim Application is, therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads as under :-

¶17

“(a) this Hon’ble Court may be permitted to add the property in respect of Bank Locker in the Schedule and extended a Letter of Administrator in favour of the Applicant.”

¶18

The Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶19

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)

¶20

Mugdha

¶21

2 of 2

Lakhimchand Doulatram Matreja v. Hassan Doulatram Matreja (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhimchand Doulatram Matreja v. Hassan Doulatram Matreja (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Ramji Patel Vs Jija Ramji Patel (Deceased)

Prema Nair w/o R K Narayan Vs Devaki Amma W/O Madhavan (Deceased)

Mahendra Kashiram Sawant Vs Kashiram Tukaram Sawant Alias Kashiram T Sawant(Deceased)

Mulund Raviraj Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Rupji Constructions a (Partnership Firm) and 2 Ors.

Annadurai Palani Swami Devendra vs the State of Maharashtra and 12 Oher

Vasant Raghunath Holkar and Anr. Vs Priya Sameer Holkar