Allowed

Raj Ramchand Makhija v. Manoharlal Bhagwandas Makhija (Deceased)

Bombay HC3 Feb 2024TP/104/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uncontested testamentary petition for Letters of Administration for the properties of a deceased who died in Mumbai. Death certificate, legal heir consent affidavit and administration bond were filed; no objections appeared. The petition was allowed and administration granted.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to petitioner for scheduled properties of the deceased, subject to office verification of bond, caveat/cross-petition check and account filing.

Raj Ramchand Makhija vs Manoharlal Bhagwandas… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 52.TP/104/2024

¶2

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 02nd April 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/104/2024 P. Ms. Shrishti Tiwar i/b Rachna Mamnani Ld. Advocate for (ECHCBM021823 C. : the Petitioner 82023)

¶5

This is a petition for the grant of Letters of Administration, under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”) for the properties left by the deceased, namely Manoharlal Bhagwandas Makhija(For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Raj Ramchand Makhija, has filed documents such as a true copy of the death certificate of the deceased, identity proof of the deceased, and oath in the prescribed format.

¶6

I have heard Ld. Advocate and peruse the petition along with the documents.

¶7

Said deceased died on 06-07-2017 at Mumbai leaving behind him legal heirs, shown in paragraph No. 4 of the petition. Petitioner states that there are no other legal heirs to the deceased, except heirs shown in the petition. Deceased left properties are shown in the schedule. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

¶8

Citation was issued, which has been duly affixed on the conspicuous part of the Hon’ble High Court and notice board of the Collector’s Office at Mumbai and 14 days have expired vide Rule 397(1) and (4) of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980(for short “BHC Rules”) and an affidavit to that effect has been filed. Notice to the collector has been issued vide Rule 396 of BHC Rules. Till today, no one appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner or nothing has been brought to the notice regarding pending litigation about the same properties. Hence, the petition is treated as an uncontested one.

¶9

Legal heir of the deceased has consented by way of Affidavit to grant the prayer of the petitioner to grant a

¶10

2 52.TP/104/2024

¶11

Letters of Administration, without reserving any right. He has accepted the facts, regarding their relationship, inter-se. 6) Petitioner has filed the administration Bond in prescribed form No. 118 with surety.

¶12

Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in view of provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the petitioner, being nephew of the deceased, is entitled to seek a Letters of Administration. Hence, facts stated by the petitioner and heir of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed, as prayed for. Hence, the following order:

¶13

ORDER

¶14

1. Petition is allowed and the Letters of Administration be granted to the petitioner for properties, left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925

¶15

1. Before issuance of the grant, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition pending or caveat resisting the petition is filed.

¶16

1. The petitioner is to file an account as undertaken in a Petitioner’s Oath within the stipulated period. Office to verify that an Administration Bond is properly executed and uploaded.

¶17

02nd April 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Raj Ramchand Makhija v. Manoharlal Bhagwandas Makhija (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Ramchand Makhija v. Manoharlal Bhagwandas Makhija (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

Poonam Lalit Kumar vs Lalit Krishanchander Kumar (Deceased)

Nandini Rajagopal vs Rajagopalan Angadipuram Ramlinga (Deceased)

Chandrashekar Gowder Son of Veerangouda Bandangouda Sankangouder vs Veeranagouda Bandangouda Sankangoudar Alias v B Sankangoudar (Deceased)

Rupesh Kumar S/O. Devaputhra Naidu and 2 Ors. vs Shreepradha Devaputra Naidu (Deceased)

Jasmit Bipin Desai vs Bipinchandra Alias Bipin Manilal Desai (Deceased)

Suhasini Subhash Gawade @ Jyotsna Gopal Parab vs Sangeeta Gopal Parab (Deceased)