Allowed

Lily Anthony Rodrigues v. Anthony Rodrigues Alias Anthony Ignatius Rodrigues (Deceased)

Bombay HC14 Dec 2024TP/3148/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition by a beneficiary under the Will of Anthony Rodrigues for Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Execution was proved through an attesting witness's affidavit, other legatees consented, citation expired unopposed. Petition granted and Letters of Administration ordered to be issued.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with Will annexed granted to petitioner upon satisfaction that administration bond is properly executed.

Lily Anthony Rodrigues vs Anthony Rodrigues Alias… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 60.TP/3148/2024

¶2

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date: 14th December, 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/3148/2024 with WILL/1256/2024

¶5

P. C. : Shri. Rohan P. Gaikwad a/w Ms. Akanksha Yadav i/B Sandeep Shinde Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner

¶6

This petition is filed by petitioner, being one of the beneficiaries under the Will executed by Anthony Rodrigues alias Anthony Ignatius Rodrigues (herein after the same is referred to as “Testator”), for grant of a Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Said Testator said to have died at Mumbai on 29-05-2016 Petitioner, namely Lily Anthony Rodrigues wd/o Anthony Rodrigues, filed the copy of death certificate, identity proof of the testator, Will, petitioner's oath.

¶7

Perused petition and Original Will. Heard Ld. Advocate for petitioner. Perused documents.

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

Petitioner stated that the deceased left behind his last Will and Testament which was duly executed at Mumbai on 07.12.2010, 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.

¶11

Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits that parents of deceased predeceased testator and testator was survived by legal heirs, as per the provisions of Indian Succession Act, 1925. Legal heirs of the testator have consented to the petition and thereby waived the service of

¶12

1 60.TP/3148/2024

¶13

Citation. The petitioner affirmed that there are no other legal heirs of the deceased.

¶14

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 treated as uncontested one.

¶15

The petitioner has filed the affidavit of Shashank Mhatre 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. According to him all additions and alteration in a Will were existed at the time of execution and before singing the Will. Hence, there is sufficient compliance of the Rule 383 of the Rules.

¶16

Properties mentioned in the schedule-I of the petition are referred in the Wil.

¶17

Other legatees, namely Melanie, Richard, Rui, Midred, other than the petitioner, have given consent to grant Letters of Administration to petitioner.

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petition is granted. 2) Office to issue Letters of

¶21

1 60.TP/3148/2024

¶22

Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner, upon satisfaction that the administration Bond is properly executed, as per the Rules, thought India.

¶23

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

14th December, 2024

¶25

Officer on Special Duty,

¶26

with Testamentary Department

Lily Anthony Rodrigues v. Anthony Rodrigues Alias Anthony Ignatius Rodrigues (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lily Anthony Rodrigues v. Anthony Rodrigues Alias Anthony Ignatius Rodrigues (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

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

Komal Sudhir Sharma vs Sudhir Satish Sharma (Deceased)

Baban Dattatray Shetake vs Dattu Alias Dattatray Nana Alias Nanaji Shetake (Deceased)

Bernard James Dcruz vs Christopher Joseph Dcruz (Deceasesd)

Akhilesh Kumar Gupta vs Rajkumar Ramlagan Gupta (Deceased)

Ganesh Vishwanath Jog vs Savita Ganesh Jog (Deceased)