Allowed

Pankaj Thakor Kothari v. Lachmi Fateechand Kripalani @ Lachmi Fatehchand Kripalani

Bombay HC22 Apr 2024TP/1370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a legatee under an unprobated Will, filed a petition for Letters of Administration. The court found no executor appointed, no other legal heirs contested, and other legatees consented. The petition was granted.

What did the court decide?

The petition is granted; the office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner.

Pankaj Thakor Kothari vs Lachmi Fateechand… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

SLG

¶2

Before : Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date : 11^th December, 2024

¶3

CALLED FOR HEARING :

¶4

TP/1370/2024

¶5

Ms. Nandita Sharma i/b. Sunil Sharma, Ld. Advocate for Petitioner

¶6

P.C. : 1) This petition is filed by petitioner, being one of the beneficiaries under the Will executed by Lachmi Fatechand Kripalani @ Lachmi Fatehchand Kripalani (herein after the same is referred to as “Testatrix”), for grant of a Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Said Testatrix said to have died at Mumbai on 20-01-2013. Petitioner, namely Pankaj Thakor Kothari, filed the copy of death certificate, identity proof of the testator, Will, petitioner's oath.

¶7

The petitioner has explained the delay vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rule, 1980 (for short “Rules”).

¶8

No executor is appointed. Hence, the petitioner is the one of the legatees named under the Will. Hence, petition is tenable.

¶9

Petitioner stated that the deceased left behind her last Will and Testament which was duly executed at Mumbai on 01.07.2005, in English language. The original Will is handed in separately for being filed and kept in a safe place in the Office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.

¶10

Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits that parents of deceased predeceased Testatrix and testator was survived by legal heir, as per the provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Legal heir of the testatrix has consented to the petition and thereby waived the service of Citation. The petitioner affirmed that there are no other legal heirs of the deceased.

¶11

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 been 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 collector has

¶12

SLG

¶13

CONTD….

¶14

TP/1370/2024

¶15

been issued vide Rule 396 of BHC Rules. Till today, no one appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner or nothing is brought to the notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same property. Hence, the petition is treated as uncontested one.

¶16

The petitioner has filed the Affidavit of Deepak Manual Solanki one of Attesting Witnesses to the Will, in form No. 102 of Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. He deposed that he was present and deceased signed the Testament in presence of him and another witness, after going through its contents. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will.

¶17

Property mentioned in the schedule-I of the petition are referred in the Will.

¶18

Other legatees, namely Monika, except petitioner, has given consent to grant Letters of Administration to petitioner.

¶19

Petitioner has executed the administration Bond in the prescribed format. Hence, following order:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

1) Petition is granted.

¶22

2) Office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner upon satisfaction that the administration Bond is properly executed, as per the Rules, thought State of Maharashtra.

¶23

3) Before issuance of Letters of Administration with Will, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is filed. Office to act accordingly.

¶24

11.12.2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Pankaj Thakor Kothari v. Lachmi Fateechand Kripalani @ Lachmi Fatehchand Kripalani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Thakor Kothari v. Lachmi Fateechand Kripalani @ Lachmi Fatehchand Kripalani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Fatima Abdul Latif Sawkar vs Abdul Latif Sawakar (Deceased)

Jessy Mammen Joseph vs (I) Late Punnaseril Mathew Abraham (Deceased)

Haresh Verhomal Vasandani vs Mahesh Verhomal Vasandani (Deceased)

Rahul Ramesh Bang vs Mahesh Bang Alias Mahesh Ghanshyamlal Bang Alias Mahesh Ghanshyam Bang(Deceased)

Ambika Divyesh Shah vs Divyesh Somchand Shah (Deceased)

Hemant Narayan Chitrekar vs Sarubai Chagan Jadhav (Deceased)