Allowed

Aditya Ashok Samant v. Ashok Dattatreya Samant (Deceased)

Bombay HC5 Dec 2024MPT/522/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for heirship certificate for the estate of a deceased intestate father. The court found the widow and three sons were the sole Class I legal heirs, with consent affidavits filed, and granted the certificate in terms of prayer clause (a), dispensing with proclamation.

What did the court decide?

Heirship certificate granted in terms of prayer clause (a); issue of proclamation dispensed with; grant expedited.

Aditya Ashok Samant vs Ashok Dattatreya Samant… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-OS:20065

¶2

30 mpt 522 of 2024.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION MISC. PETITION NO.522 OF 2024

¶4

Aditya Ashok Samant

¶5

… Petitioner

¶6

Ashok Dattatreya Samant … Deceased

¶7

Mr. Sushil A. Inamdar i/by Mr. Ajit Shrikhande, for Petitioner.

¶8

CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.

¶9

DATE : 5 DECEMBER 2024

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

¶12

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

¶13

Ashok Dattatreya Samant (deceased) was the father of the Petitioner. The deceased passed away on 30 April 2019. At the time of his death, the deceased had a fixed place of abode at 3, Hemprabha 68 Marine Drive, Mumbai 400 020.

¶14

The Petitioner avers that the deceased died intestate and despite diligent search, no testamentary writing or Will has been found. The deceased left behind Usha Samant – the widow and three sons, namely, Ajay, Dhananjay and Aditya – the Petitioner, the particulars of whom are furnished in the table at paragraph No.4 of the Petition. There is no other legal heir. Heirship certificate is required to produce the same before the concerned

¶15

SSP 1/2

¶16

30 mpt 522 of 2024.doc

¶17

authorities.

¶18

I have perused the averments in the Petition. The documents lend support to the claim of the Petitioner. The Petitioner and the heirs mentioned Sr. Nos.1 to 3 in the table at paragraph No.4 of the Petition appear to be the surviving Class I legal heirs of the deceased. There is no other legal heir. The heirs mentioned at Sr. Nos.1 to 3 have filed affidavits giving their consent for grant of heirship certificate. I do not find any impediment in granting heirship certificate.

¶19

Hence, the following order :

¶20

ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

“(a) that the Heirship Certificate be granted to him to certify that (1) Usha Ashok Samant (2) Ajay Ashok Samant, (3) Dhananjay Ashok Samant and (4) Aditya Ashok Samant I.e. the Petitioner abovenamed are the legal Heirs and representatives of the said deceased under the Provisions of the Bombay Regulation Act, VIII of 1827 with copy of the Schedule I hereto to the said Heirship Certificate (Exh. E hereto).

¶23

(ii) Issue of proclamation is dispensed with. (iii) Grant expedited.

¶24

( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

¶25

SSP 2/2

¶26

Signed by: S.S.Phadke Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 06/12/2024 11:15:17

Aditya Ashok Samant v. Ashok Dattatreya Samant (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Ashok Samant v. Ashok Dattatreya Samant (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

Similar cases

Suresh Bhimrao Bamne vs Lata Suresh Bamne (Deceased)

Sreemathi Thalangan Puthiyaveetil vs Thalangan Rarichan Puthiyaveetil (Deceased)

Tehrnoo Soonawlla Alise Tehrnoo Kambiz Aari Soonawalla vs Thirty Kaikhushroo Soonawalla (Deceased)

Akshay Umesh Rikame vs Govind Krishna Rikame alias Govind Krishna (Deceased)

Subhash Gunaji Parab vs Gunaji Ramchandra Parab

Carlos Joseph Noronha vs Late Crispina Noronha (Deceased)