Allowed

Kriti Mukhopadhyay v. Gautam Mukhopadhyay (Deceased)

Bombay HC28 Aug 2024MPT/449/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for grant of heirship certificate under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 for the estate of the petitioner's deceased father, who died intestate. The widow and son consented by affidavits; the court found no impediment and allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Legal Heirship Certificate issued in terms of prayer clause (a); issue of proclamation dispensed with; grant expedited.

Kriti Mukhopadhyay vs Gautam Mukhopadhyay (Deceased) — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-OS:13844

¶2

29 mptl 21351 of 2024-2.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION MISC. PETITION (L) NO.21351 OF 2024

¶4

Kriti Mukhopadhyay … Petitioner

¶5

Gautam Mukhopadhyay … Deceased

¶6

Mr. Rahul R. Singh, for Petitioner

¶7

CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.

¶8

DATE : 28 AUGUST 2024

¶9

P.C.

¶10

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

¶11

This petition is filed for grant of heirship certificate under Section 2 of the Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827.

¶12

Gautam Mukhopadhyay (deceased) was the father of the Petitioner. The deceased passed away on 27 May 2022. At the time of his death, the deceased had a fixed place of abode at Shivneri Building, Flat No. 703, A.S. Marg, IIT Bombay Staff CHS. Ltd., Powai, Mumbai - 400076,

¶13

The Petitioner avers that the deceased died intestate and despite diligent search, no testamentary writing or Will has been found. The deceased was survived by Pragati; the widow; a Kirti, daughter and Petitioner herein, and Kunal; a son, particulars of whom are furnished in the table at paragraph 9 of the Petition. The Petitioner avers, there is

¶14

SSP (corrected order as per speaking to the Minutes of Order dated 6 Sept. 2024) 1/2

¶15

29 mptl 21351 of 2024-2.doc no other legal heirs. Heirship certificate is required to lay claim over the properties described in the Schedule (exhibit C) appended to the Petition.

¶16

I have perused the averments in the Petition. The documents annexed to the Petition lend support of the claim of the Petitioner. The Petitioner, her mother and brother Kunal appear to be the only surviving Class I heirs of the deceased. Pragati and Kunal have filed affidavits giving their consent for grant of heirship certificate. Thus, I do not find any impediment in granting heirship certificate.

¶17

Hence, the following order :

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(i) The Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads as under :

¶20

“(a) That Legal Heirship Certificate be issued Certifying that the Petitioner along with Legal Heirs as mentioned above are only Heir and Legal Representative of the Deceased under the provision of Bombay Regulation Act VIII of 1827; (ii) Issue of proclamation is dispensed with. (iii) Grant expedited.

¶21

( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

¶22

SSP (corrected order as per speaking to the Minutes of Order dated 6 Sept. 2024) 2/2

¶23

Signed by: S.S.Phadke Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 09/09/2024 11:03:03

Kriti Mukhopadhyay v. Gautam Mukhopadhyay (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kriti Mukhopadhyay v. Gautam Mukhopadhyay (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hemlata Kulinkant Kenia vs Kulinkant Jadavji Kenia

Avekino Antonio Clara D Souza vs Clara Antonio D Souza (Deceased)

Ramakant Ramshankar Shukla vs Ramshankar Shivshankar Shukla (Deceased)

Neelam Mukesh Bhatia vs Mukesh Parshotamdas Bhatia (Deceased)

Ravindra Khushalchand Mehta vs Pushpavati Mehta Alias Pushpavati Khushalchand Mehta (Deceased)

Kriti Mukhopadhyay vs Gautam Mukhopadhyay (Deceased)