Disposed

Chandrabala Alias Minaxi Manharlal and 4 Ors. v. Manharlal Manilal Mehta Alias M.M. Mehta Alias Maharlal M Mehta (Deceased)

Bombay HC25 Apr 2024IA/669/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an uncontested letters-of-administration proceeding, the court permitted amendment of the testamentary petition to substitute the widow and daughter of a petitioner who died during pendency, and to delete the name of another petitioner whose legal heirs were already on record.

What the court decided

AI extract

Chandrabala Alias Minaxi Manharlal and 4 Ors. Vs… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

bipin prithiani

2-ia-669.22.doc

BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI

¶5

Digitally signed by BIPINDHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2024.04.26 14:24:57 +0530

¶6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

¶7

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 669 OF 2022 IN

¶8

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 343 OF 2022

¶9

Chandrabala alias Minaxi Manharlal & Ors.

¶10

… Applicants/ Petitioners

¶11

Manharlal Manilal Mehta alias M. M. Mehta alias Maharlal M. Mehta

¶12

… Deceased

¶13

¶14

Mr. Milind S. Gyani for Applicants.

¶15

¶16

CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 25^th APRIL 2024

¶17

P.C. :

¶18

. Heard learned counsel for the applicants.

¶19

By this application, the applicants seek permission to amend the testamentary petition, as per the schedule annexed to the application, in the light of the fact that during pendency of the petition, petitioner No.4 expired. Copy of death certificate is annexed at Exhibit ‘A’, which shows that petitioner No.4 expired on 10^th November 2011. The schedule of amendment at Exhibit ‘B’ shows that the widow and daughter of the deceased petitioner No.4 are sought to be brought on record.

¶20

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is

bipin prithiani

2-ia-669.22.doc

allowed, as per prayer clause (a), which reads as follows :

¶25

“(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to permit the Applicants to amend the above Testamentary Petition as per the “Schedule of Amendment” being Exhibit: “B”to the Interim Application.”

¶26

The amendments be carried out within two weeks from today. Re-verification is dispensed with.

¶27

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants informs this Court that during the pendency of the application disposed of hereinabove, petitioner No.1 also expired on 20^th June 2023. The learned counsel for the applicants (original petitioners) has tendered a copy of death certificate to show that the petitioner No.1 expired on 20^th June 2023. He has also tendered a schedule of amendment, whereby it is proposed that the name of the petitioner No.1 be deleted, as legal heirs of petitioner No.1 are already on record.

¶28

It is relevant to note that this is an uncontested proceeding for grant of letters of administration.

¶29

The copy of death certificate and the proposed schedule of amendment tendered by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants (petitioners) are taken on record.

¶30

In the interest of justice, the petitioners are permitted to delete the name of the petitioner No.1 in terms of the aforesaid schedule taken on record.

bipin prithiani

2-ia-669.22.doc

The amendments be carried out within the aforesaid period of two weeks from today. Re-verification is dispensed with.

¶35

MANISH PITALE, J.

Chandrabala Alias Minaxi Manharlal and 4 Ors. v. Manharlal Manilal Mehta Alias M.M. Mehta Alias Maharlal M Mehta (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Chandrabala Alias Minaxi Manharlal and 4 Ors. v. Manharlal Manilal Mehta Alias M.M. Mehta Alias Maharlal M Mehta (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushant Digambar Ghotakar vs State of Maharashtra

Rajanikant Naranbhai Patel Vs Yogeshkumar N. Patel

Rohit Uday Bhagwat Vs Rekha Ramchandra Limaye (Caveator)

Rohit Ravindra Sonawale vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rohit Bhivram Labhade vs State of Maharashtra

Tanmay Uday Kakade vs the State of Maharashtra