Allowed

Swarupa Milind Velkar v. Anant Pandurang Velkar Alias Anant Pandurang Velkar (Deceased)

Bombay HC23 Feb 2024TP/4171/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three testamentary petitions for Letters of Administration with Will annexed and succession certificates, filed by the widow of an earlier petitioner whose grants lapsed after his death. The court allowed all three petitions, subject to undertakings to pay the deceased's brother's share if claimed.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with Will annexed and succession certificates granted, subject to affidavit undertakings to pay the brother of the deceased his share if he claims it in future.

Swarupa Milind Velkar Vs Anant Pandurang Velkar… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

902.TP.4171.2022.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

¶3

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 4171 OF 2022

¶4

Anant Pandurang Velkar alias Anant Pandurang Velker

¶5

Swarupa Milind Velkar

...Deceased

...Petitioner

WITH

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 4066 OF 2022

¶10

WITH TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 865 OF 2009

¶11

¶12

SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI

¶13

Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Date: 2024.02.26 17:54:44 +0530

¶14

Mr. Ravindra Patkar and Mr. Jayant Wani, for Petitioner in all petitions.

¶15

 Ms. Rekha Rane, Testamentary Registrar.

¶16

¶17

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 23^rd FEBRUARY, 2024.

¶18

P. C. :

¶19

These three petitions concern grant of Letters of

¶20

Administration with Will annexed and for grant of succession certificate in respect of the properties left behind by the deceased.

¶21

Earlier the husband of the petitioner had filed one probate petition and two petitions for grant of succession certificates. The said petitions had been allowed and grants were issued, but before appropriate steps could be taken in terms of the grants, the husband of the petitioner expired.

¶22

As a consequence, the petitioner, who is the widow of the said earlier petitioner, has filed the present proceedings.

Page1 of 3

Shrikant Malani

902.TP.4171.2022.doc

The petitioner herein moved an application for amendment in the original probate petition filed by her husband. Such amendment was granted by an order dated 16^th January, 2023, as a consequence of which, the original probate petition was converted into a petition for grant of Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Apart from the said proceeding, the petitioner was constrained to file two fresh testamentary petitions for grant of succession certificates, particularly in respect of securities lying to the credit of the deceased.

¶27

It is further brought to the notice of this Court that when the husband of the petitioner had filed the testamentary petitions, the brother of the deceased had given his consent in all the three petitions.

¶28

But, when the aforesaid two testamentary petitions for grant of succession certificates were filed by the petitioner herein, the brother of the deceased did not respond. As a consequence, the petitioner was constrained to publish notice in the newspaper and yet there was no response from the brother of the deceased.

¶29

In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court may consider allowing the petitions for issuance of grants as prayed, on undertakings on affidavit being filed in the present petitions by the petitioner, whereby she would

Page2 of 3

Shrikant Malani

902.TP.4171.2022.doc

undertake to pay the share of the brother of the deceased, if at all, he claims his share in the future.

¶34

Considering the peculiar circumstances of the present case, where the widow of the original petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court, due to the fact that appropriate steps could not be taken in the context of grants issued earlier, in the interest of justice, this Court is inclined to grant the prayers made on behalf of the petitioner.

¶35

This Court is further informed that otherwise the petitions are uncontested.

¶36

In view of the above, the petitions are allowed, subject to undertakings being filed on affidavit by the petitioner in all three petitions that in the event the brother of the deceased claims his share in future, she shall pay the same to him.

¶37

The department to take consequential steps in the matter.

¶38

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶39

Page3 of 3

¶40

Shrikant Malani

Swarupa Milind Velkar v. Anant Pandurang Velkar Alias Anant Pandurang Velkar (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swarupa Milind Velkar v. Anant Pandurang Velkar Alias Anant Pandurang Velkar (Deceased)

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

Similar cases

Janak Jitendra Shah Vs Manjula Jitendra Shah and Asit Atul Shah (Deceased)

Sabira Abubakar Abbasi and 5 Ors. Vs Rajubhai Khubbhai Abbasi and 2 Ors. and Fazal R ABBASI(2A to 2C) and 2 Ors.

Pankaj Jamnadas Khakhar Vs Bharat Jamnadas Khakhar - Caveator

Lords Inn Hotels and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs Vikas Seth Trading as Lord Residency Manali

Leela Ajit Deshpande vs Meenal J. Chatterji Alias Mrs Meenal Chatterji Alias Mrs Meenal Commodore J. Chatterji Alias

Arun Govind Phalke vs Late Govind Maruti Phalke Since Deceased