Allowed

Madhubala Kailash Shah v. Kailash Harilal Shah (Deceased)

Bombay HC23 Apr 2024TP/1687/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uncontested testamentary petition by two widows seeking Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act for properties left by their deceased husbands, with heirs' consent affidavits and administration bond filed.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to both petitioners for the properties in the schedule, subject to office verification and filing of account as per oath.

Madhubala Kailash Shah vs Kailash Harilal Shah… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 44.TP/1687/2024

¶2

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date:- 05^th July, 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

44.TP/1687/2024 P. Shri. Nikhil Udeshi Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner C. :

¶5

[Original] (ECHCBM020251 02023)

¶6

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 (1) Kailash Harilal Shah and (2) Harilal Khetshibhai Shah (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioners, namely (1) Madhubala Kailash Shah and (2) Shantaben Harilal Shah, have filed documents such as true copy of the death certificates of the deceased, identity proof of the deceased, oath in the prescribed format, affidavit of service citation.

¶7

I have heard Ld. Advocate and perused the petition along with the documents. Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner submitted that he has uploaded administration bond online having document no. EDHCBM02339172024

¶8

Said deceased died No. 1 Married and No.2 Married on No. 1 died on 11/05/2021 and deceased No. 2 died on 04/01/2011 at Bhayander, Dist Thane leaving behind them legal heirs, shown in the paragraph No. 4 of the petition. Petitioners state 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

¶10

2 44.TP/1687/2024

¶11

brought to the notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same properties. Hence, the petition is 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

Petitioners have filed the administration Bond in prescribed form No. 118 with surety.

¶14

Ld. Advocate for the petitioners submitted that in view of provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the petitioner No. 1 being the widow of Deceased No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 being the widow of the deceased No. 2, are 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 petitioners 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. Before issuance of the grant, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition is pending or caveat resisting the petition is filed.

¶18

1. The petitioners to file an account as under taken in a Petitioner’s Oath within stipulated period. Necessary endorsement be made on the administration Bond, subject to satisfaction of the Department.

¶19

05.07.2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Madhubala Kailash Shah v. Kailash Harilal Shah (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhubala Kailash Shah v. Kailash Harilal Shah (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

Nipa Rajnikant Doshi vs Divya Rajnikant Doshi and Rajnikant Fathechandbhai Doshi (Deceased)

Vijay Kumar Puranlal Mathur vs Nilkanth Bhaishankar Desai - Deceased

Rinku Dayal Hemrajani vs Durupati Motilal Vaswani (Deceased)

Manjula Ramesh Jadhav vs Shankar Dharma Patil

Saurabh S Mehta vs Suhas Mehta Alias Suhas Sureshchandra Mehta,Sureshchandra Amritlal Mehta Alias Suresh Mehta

Kusum Krishnaji Mangela vs Krishna Manik Mangela