Allowed

Kiran Gajanan Talwar v. Vijaysudha Gajanan Talwar Aka Smt Vijaysudha Talwar (Deceased)

Bombay HC1 Jul 2024TP/1010/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Beneficiary under a Will sought Letters of Administration with Will annexed after the testatrix died without appointing an executor. Execution was proved by an attesting witness's affidavit, consent affidavit of the other legal heir was filed, and administration bond executed. Petition granted and Letters of Administration ordered to be issued.

What the court decided

AI extract

Kiran Gajanan Talwar vs Vijaysudha Gajanan Talwar… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

SLG

¶2

BEFORE : MR. DILIP S. GURAV, FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER Date: 9^th July, 2024

¶3

CALLED FOR COMPLIANCE :

¶4

29 TP/1010/2024 )

¶5

Ms. Chaitra Rao, Advocate for petitioner

¶6

)

¶7

) P.C.: ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

¶8

1. Perused Petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for petitioner. This petition is f i led by petitioner, being only benef i ciary named under the Will executed by Vijaysudha Gajanan Talwar (herein after the same is referred to as “Testatrix”), for grant of Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Testatrix said to have died on 28.10.2023 at Mumbai. Petitioner f i led the copy of death certif i cate (which is annexed to petition as Exhibit- A ), identity proof of the testatrix (which is annexed to petition as Exhibit-A1), Will, petitioner's oath, af fi davits of legal heirs of the testatrix.

¶9

2. The petitioner has f i led petition within prescribe d limit as per Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rule, 1980 (for short “Rules”).

¶10

3. The testat ri x has not appointed executor to execute the Will. The petitioner is being only benef i ciary named under the Will. Hence, petition is tenable.

¶11

4. Petitioner stated that the testatrix left behind her last Will and Testament which was duly executed at Mumbai on 15.10.2022, in English language. Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits that the original Will is handed in separately for being fled and kept in a safe i place in the Ofce of the Prothonotary and Senior fi Master, High Court, Bombay.

¶12

5. Petitioner states that parents of testatrix were predeceased to her and testatrix was survived by legal heir shown in the paragraph No. 9 . of the petition, as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Testatrix died leaving behind son namely Kiran Gajanan Talwar – petitioner herein and married daughter namely Kavita Sunil Sabarwal. Consent Afdavit of Kavita fi Sunil Sabarwal dated 05.12.2023 is on record. She has given her consent in the form of Afdavit, …... fi 2

SLG

CONTD….

– 2 –

which is fled on the record by the petitioner and i consented for the issuance of Letters of Administration with Will annexed in favour of the petitioner without justifying any surety in respect of her share in the estate of the testatrix. She has waived the Service of Citation. The petitioner afrmed that there are no other legal fi heirs of the testatrix other than mentioned in para 9 of the petition.

¶17

6. Afdavit of Service of General Citation is f fi led, i stating that citation has been af fi xed on the Notice Board of the Hon’ble High Court, Bombay and notice board of the Collector’s ofce on fi 01.06.2024. Notice to collector has been sent.

¶18

7. The petitioner has f i led the Afdavit of fi Satish Manohar Parchure dated 05.12.2023, one of Attesting Witnesses to the Will, in the Form No.102 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. Attesting witness deposed that he was present and testatrix signed on the Testament papers in presence of hi s and another witness. According to him, all additions and alteration, in a Will, were existed at the time of execution and before signing the Will. Hence, there is suf fi cient compliance of the Rule 383 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. Attesting witness further deposed that at the time of execution of the Will, testatrix was of sound and disposing mind, memory and understanding. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will.

¶19

8. Properties mentioned in the schedule of the petition are referred in the Will. Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits as mentioned in para 6 of the petition, which reads as under :

¶20

“That the Petitioner has truly set forth in Schedule No.I, hereto annexed and marked Exhibit ‘C’, all the property and credits which the deceased died possessed of or entitled to at the time of her death, which have or are likely to come to her hands. So far as the Petitioner has been able to ascertain or is aware, there are no property and …..3

¶21

SLG

¶22

CONTD…. – 3 –

¶23

) credits other than what are specif i ed in the 29 TP/1010/2024 ) Schedule attached to the petition”. ) ) The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that ) properties available to the testator at the time of his ) death are mentioned in the Schedule-I of the petition. ) 9. Petitioner has executed the administration Bond ) dated 19 th June, 2024, in the prescribed format. Hence, ) following order: ) ORDER ) ) 1) Petition is granted. ) 2) Ofce to issue Letters of Administration with Will fi ) annexed as per the provisions of the Indian Succession ) Act, 1925 to the petitioner and upon satisfaction that the ) administration Bond is properly executed, as per the ) Rules. ) ) 3) Before issuance of above said Letters of ) Administration with Will, the ofce to verify that there fi ) is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is fled. Of i ce fi ) to act accordingly

¶24

09.07.2024 FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER

Kiran Gajanan Talwar v. Vijaysudha Gajanan Talwar Aka Smt Vijaysudha Talwar (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Kiran Gajanan Talwar v. Vijaysudha Gajanan Talwar Aka Smt Vijaysudha Talwar (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jaspal Singh Prehlad Singh Chandock vs Prehlad Singh Hari Singh Chandock(Deceased)

Chitra Purushottam Shirodkar vs Purushottam Shivram Shirodkar

Chanchal Kaur Oberai vs Gurvinder Singh Jaswant Singh Oberai

Sushila Sharma vs Bal Krishna Sharma (Deceased)

Claire Pereira vs Myles Freeman Ferreira Alias Myles Paul Ferreira Alias Myles Primel Paulu Ferreil (Deceased)

Piloo Fali Bomanjee vs Yazad Fali Bomanjee