Allowed

Bharati Baliram Gharkar v. Baliram Krishna Gharkar

Bombay HC26 Jun 2024TP/1482/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition for Letters of Administration for properties of a deceased who died a widower in Mumbai. Citation was issued with no objections; legal heirs consented by affidavits and an administration bond was filed. The court treated the petition as uncontested and granted Letters of Administration to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner for the scheduled properties; account to be filed as undertaken in the oath.

Bharati Baliram Gharkar vs Baliram Krishna Gharkar — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 35.TP/1482/2024

¶2

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 23rd July, 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/1482/2024 P. Ms. Babita Pandey a/w shri. Dinesh Sonawane Ld. Advocate C. : [Original] for the Petitioner

¶5

[Original]

¶6

(ECHCBM0208334 2023)

¶7

This is a petition for grant of Letters of Administration, under the Provisions of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”) for the properties left by the deceased, namely Baliram Krishna Gharkar (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Bharati Baliram Gharkar, has filed documents such as true copy of the death certificate of the deceased, identity proof of the deceased, oath in the prescribed format, affidavit of service citation. 2) I have heard Ld. Advocate and perused the petition along with the documents.

¶8

Said deceased died as a Widower on 20/04/2005 at Mumbai leaving behind him legal heir, shown in the 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 shown in the schedule. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

¶9

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 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 properties. Hence, the petition is

¶10

2 35.TP/1482/2024

¶11

treated as uncontested one.

¶12

Legal heirs of the deceased have consented by way of Affidavits to grant prayer of petitioner to grant a Letters of Administration, without reserving any right. They have accepted the facts, regarding their relationship, inter-se.

¶13

Petitioner has filed the administration Bond in prescribed form No. 118 with surety.

¶14

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

¶15

ORDER

¶16

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 prescribed format as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

¶17

1. The petitioner to file an account as under taken in a Petitioner’s Oath within stipulated period.

¶18

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

¶19

Officer on Special Duty,

¶20

23rd July, 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Bharati Baliram Gharkar v. Baliram Krishna Gharkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharati Baliram Gharkar v. Baliram Krishna Gharkar

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

Vikas Vinayak Joshi vs Sushilabai Vinayak Joshi (Deceased)

Mr. Dattatray Kalyanji Patel vs Mrs. Vatsala Kalyanji Patel (Deceased)

Nilesh Shyamsundar Palwankar vs Shyamsundar Sadashiv Palwankar (Deceased)

Karthik Krishnan vs Late L. R. Ramachandran -Deceased

Karthik Krishnan vs Late L. R. Ramachandran -Deceased

Pushpalata Mohan Bhoir vs Mohan Mahadev Bhoir