Allowed

Jai Rustomji Bhajiwalla v. Framroze Jehanbux Sethna - Deceased

Bombay HC6 Nov 2023IA/2015/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An interim application in a testamentary petition was allowed. The court exempted the applicant from filing fresh consent affidavits of legal heirs and submitting an additional administration bond, considering it cumbersome and noting existing consent regarding the will.

What did the court decide?

Exemption from filing consent affidavits of legal heirs and from submitting an additional Administration Bond for the after grant amendment to the letters of administration.

Jai Rustomji Bhajiwalla Vs Framroze Jehanbux… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-OS:13275

¶2

16.IA.2015.2023.doc

¶3

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

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2015 OF 2023

¶5

¶6

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 32 OF 2015

¶7

Framroze Jehanbux Sethna ...Deceased Jai Rustomji Bhajiwalla ...Applicant/Petitioner ***  Mr. Jamshyed Master, a/w Ms. Shireen Pochkhanawalla i/b Maneksha & Sethna, for Applicant/Petitioner. ***

¶8

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 06^th NOVEMBER, 2023.

¶9

P. C. :

¶10

Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant (Original

¶11

Petitioner).

¶12

It is submitted that this Court by an order dated 06^th December, 2022, allowed post grant amendment to Letters of Administration issued on 28^th June, 2017.

¶13

It is submitted that by the post grant amendment certain items in the schedule stood amended.

¶14

It is submitted that by this application, the Applicant seeks exemption from filing consent affidavits of all the legal heirs shown in paragraph no. 9 of the original petition. It is submitted that the amendment to the schedule granted by this Court does not materially alter the nature of consent given by the aforesaid legal

Page1 of 2

Shrikant Malani

16.IA.2015.2023.doc

heirs because in their consent affidavits they had specifically submitted that they had no objection in respect of the Will executed by the deceased.

¶19

This Court is convinced that since the filing of fresh Consent affidavits may become a cumbersome exercise, the prayer made on behalf of the Applicant deserves to be granted.

¶20

In view of the above, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), which read as follows :

¶21

“(a) filing of the consent affidavits of all the legal heirs shown in Paragraph No. 9 of the petition, in respect of carrying out after grant amendments be dispensed with.

¶22

(b) the submission of an additional Administration Bond for the after grant amendment be dispensed with; and”

¶23

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶24

Page2 of 2

¶25

Shrikant Malani

Jai Rustomji Bhajiwalla v. Framroze Jehanbux Sethna - Deceased

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Rustomji Bhajiwalla v. Framroze Jehanbux Sethna - Deceased

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priti Deepak Nayak Vs Maniben Chotu Nayak (Deceased)

Amogh Moreshwar Ghaisas vs Mehroo Noshir Irani

Suraj Co. Operative Housing Society Limited through Treasurer Dinesh Kalal vs Anjana Satyajit Kanjilal and Ors.

Lal Parmanand Kanuga vs Sheroo Parmanand Kanuga and 13 Ors.

Lal Parmanand Kanuga vs Sheroo Parmanand Kanuga and 13 Ors.

Nagin Chagan Patel vs Bima Chagan Bharwad