Allowed

Khorshed Burjis Vesuna v. Perviz Jehangirji Engineer

Bombay HC24 Apr 2024TP/2380/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Testamentary petition for Letters of Administration for properties left by a spinster who died in London. Citation expired without objection; legal heirs consented by affidavits. The petition was treated as uncontested and allowed.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner for the deceased's scheduled properties, subject to verification of no caveat/cross-petition and filing of account.

Khorshed Burjis Vesuna vs Perviz Jehangirji Engineer — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 77.TP/2380/2024

¶2

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 01st July 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

77.TP/2380/2024 P. [Original] C. : (ECHCBM020762 92023)

¶5

Ms. Swati Mathkar a/w Ms. Bharti Nyaynirgune i/b Vishal Thadani Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner

¶6

1) 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 Perviz Jehangirji Engineer (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Khorshed Burjis Vesuna, 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.

¶7

2) 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 having document no. EDHCBM02373062024 and affidavit of service online having document no. EDHCBM02362962024 3) Said deceased died spinster on 06/06/2012 at London(UK) leaving behind her legal heirs, 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. Ld. Advocate for the petitioner has pointed the provisions of the Sec. 55 and relevant schedule of the IS Act. Deceased left properties shown in the schedule. The petitioner states that there was another Testamentary Petition having No. 532 of 2020 for succession(Ex.H). Hence, there is no delay.

¶8

4) 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

¶9

2 77.TP/2380/2024

¶10

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 treated as uncontested one.

¶11

5) 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.

¶12

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

¶13

7) Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in view of provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the petitioner, being Sister of the deceased, is entitled to seek a Letters of Administration. Hence, facts stated by petitioner and heir of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, petition deserves to be allowed, as prayed for. Hence, following order:

¶14

ORDER

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

3) The petitioner 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.

¶18

4) The department is directed to expedite the issuance of the Grant as per the Order of the Hon’ble Court dated 24.04.2024.

¶19

01^st July 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Khorshed Burjis Vesuna v. Perviz Jehangirji Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khorshed Burjis Vesuna v. Perviz Jehangirji Engineer

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

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

Parimal Indravadan Dalal vs Smita Indravadan Dalal (Deceased)

Sejal Jayesh Mehta Alias Sejal Subodh Barodia vs Panna Subodh Barodia (Deceased)

Navin Ramniklal Doshi vs Hema Navin Doshi (Deceased)

Purnima Kumar vs Shobhana Bhanuprasad Gohil(Deceased)

Adnan Hashimali Siddiqui vs Hashimali Siddiqui