Disposed

Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan v. Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadeo Bambarkar (Deceased)

Bombay HC29 Apr 2024TP/608/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Probate petition by the sole legal representative of the sole legatee under the testatrix's Will seeking Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Attesting witness affidavit and compliance with High Court Rules were accepted; execution of the Will stood proved.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with Will annexed ordered to be issued to the petitioner upon verification of the executed administration bond and absence of caveat.

Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan vs Vijaya Mahadev… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

SLG

¶2

BEFORE : MR. DILIP S. GURAV, FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER Date: 27^th September, 2024

¶3

CALLED FOR COMPLIANCE :

¶4

26 TP/608/2024 ) Mr. Sharad Korgaonkar, Advocate for petitioner

¶5

) ) P.C.: 1. Perused Petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for petitioner. ) This petition is f i led by petitioner, being sole legal ) representative of sole legatee named under the Will ) executed by Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar (herein after ) the same is referred to as “Testatrix”), for grant of ) Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Testatrix ) said to have died on 17.04.2021 at Mumbai. Petitioner ) f i led the copy of death certif i cate (which is annexed to ) petition as Exhibit- A ), identity proof of the testatrix ) (which is annexed to petition as Exhibit- A1), Will ) along with its ofcial translation, petitioner's oath. fi ) 2. The petitioner has f i led petition within prescribe d ) limit as per Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court ) (Original Side) Rule, 1980 (for short “Rules”). ) ) 3. The testatr i x has not appointed Executor to execute ) the Will. The petitioner is being sole legal ) representative of sole legatee named under the Will. ) Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits that as per Will, ) testatrix had bequeathed her properties to her brother ) namely Jagannath Krishna Dhamankar and said ) Jagannath Dhakankar died on 30.04.2021. Hence, ) petition is tenable. ) 4. Petitioner stated that the testatrix left behind her ) ) last Will and Testament which was duly executed at ) Mumbai on 25.05.2018, in Marathi language. Its ofcial fi ) translation is fled on the record. Ld i . Advocate for ) petitioner submits that the original Will No. 280 of ) 2024 is handed in separately for being f i led and kept in ) a safe place in the Ofce of the Prothonotary and Senior fi ) Master, High Court, Bombay. ) 5. Petitioner states that husband of testatrix w as ) predeceased to her and testatrix was survived by legal ) heirs shown in the paragraph No. 8 of the petition, …. 2

¶6

SLG

¶7

CONTD…. – 2 – ) 26 TP/608/2024 ) as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Husband of testatrix namely Mahadevo V. ) Bambarkar died on 25.02.1984 and his death certif i cate ) is annexed as Exhibit – “D”. Testatrix died as issue-less. ) Husband of testatrix had no brother and sister. Ld. ) Advocate for petitioner has carried out amendment on ) 25.09.2024 and petitioner stated on oath that husband ) of testatrix has left no legal heirs as per section 8 of the ) Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Class II Entry IV to IX. ) ) Father and mother of testatrix predeceased to her. ) Testatrix had only one brother namely Jagannath ) Krishna Dhamankar. He died on 30.04.2021. Wife of ) said brother of testatrix namely Jayashri J. Dhamankar ) also expired on 24.04.2021 due to COVID. Copies of ) said death certif i cates of Jagannath K. Dhamankar (sole ) legatee) and his wife Jayashri Dhamankar are annexed ) to the petition as Exhibits “E” and “F” respectively. ) They died leaving behind only one daughter namely ) Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan – petitioner herein. The The ) petitioner af fi rmed that there are no other legal heirs of ) the testatrix other than mentioned in para No. 8 of thetestatrix other than mentioned in para No. 8 of the ) petition. ) ) 6. Afdavit of Service of General Citation is f fi led, i ) stating that citation has been afxed on the Notice fi ) Board of the Hon’ble High Court, Bombay and notice ) board of the Collector’s ofce on fi 05.06.2024. Notice to collector has been sent. ) ) 7. The petitioner has f i led the Afdavit of fi Swapnali ) Avinash Acharekar dated 28.01.2023, one of Attesting ) Witness to the Will, in the Form No.102 of the Bombay ) High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. Attesting ) Witness deposed that she was present and testatrix ) signed on the Testament papers in presence of her and ) another witness. According to her, all additions and ) alteration, in a Will, were existed at the time of ) execution and before signing the Will. Hence, there is ) suf fi cient compliance of the Rule 383 of the Bombay ) High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 . Attesting ) Witness deposed that Will was written in …...3 )

¶8

Father and mother of testatrix predeceased to her. Testatrix had only one brother namely Jagannath Krishna Dhamankar. He died on 30.04.2021. Wife of said brother of testatrix namely Jayashri J. Dhamankar also expired on 24.04.2021 due to COVID. Copies of said death certif i cates of Jagannath K. Dhamankar (sole legatee) and his wife Jayashri Dhamankar are annexed to the petition as Exhibits “E” and “F” respectively. They died leaving behind only one daughter namely Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan – petitioner herein. The The petitioner af fi rmed that there are no other legal heirs of the testatrix other than mentioned in para No. 8 of thetestatrix other than mentioned in para No. 8 of the petition.

SLG

CONTD....

– 3 –

) 26 TP/608/2024 ) Marathi language and testatrix has signed in Marathi language. She had explained and interpreted the ) contents of the Will to the testatrix in Marathi language ) before execution of the Will. Will was duly registered ) before Joint Sub-Registrar, Mumbai I under registration ) No. BBE-1/III/2532/2018. Attesting Witness furtherAttesting Witness furtherWitness furtheritness further ) deposed that at the time of execution of the Will,ill, ) testatrix was of sound and disposing mind, memory and ) understanding. Hence, enough evidence is on record to ) accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is ) succeeded to prove the execution of Will. ) ) 8. Properties mentioned in the schedule of the petition ) are referred in the Will. Ld. Advocate for petitioner ) submits that as mentioned in para No. 6 of the petition, ) which reads as under : ) ) “That the petitioner has truly set forth in Schedule No.I hereto annexed and marked as Ex. ‘C’ all the ) ) property and credit which the deceased died ) possessed of or entitles to at the time of her death, ) which have ore are likely to come to the ) petitioner’s hands”. ) The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that ) properties available to the testatr i x at the time of her ) death are mentioned in the Schedule – I of the petition. ) 9. Petitioner has executed the Administration Bond ) dated 02.07.2024, in the prescribed format. Hence, ) following order: ) ORDER ) 1) Petition is granted. ) 2) Ofce to issue Letters of Administration with Will fi ) annexed as per the provisions of the Indian Succession ) Act, 1925 to the petitioner and upon satisfaction that the ) administration Bond is properly executed, as per the ) Rules. ) 3) Before issuance of above said Letters of ) Administration with Will, the ofce to verify that there fi ) is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is f i led. Ofce fi ) to act accordingly.

¶13

Marathi language and testatrix has signed in Marathi language. She had explained and interpreted the contents of the Will to the testatrix in Marathi language before execution of the Will. Will was duly registered before Joint Sub-Registrar, Mumbai I under registration No. BBE-1/III/2532/2018. Attesting Witness furtherAttesting Witness furtherWitness furtheritness further deposed that at the time of execution of the Will,ill, testatrix was of sound and disposing mind, memory and understanding. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will.

¶14

FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER

¶15

27.09.2024

¶16

SLG

Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan v. Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadeo Bambarkar (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhavi Madhukar Bhogan v. Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadev Bambarkar Alias Vijaya Mahadeo Bambarkar (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

Farida Anand vs Jehanzeb Peter Chinoy Alias Jehanzeb Abdul Kayum Chinoy (Deceased)

Anand Kishin Bhatia vs Radha Kishin Bhatia(Deceased)

Salim Sadruddin Zindani vs Sadruddin Rahim Noormohamed Zindani (Deceased) and Zarina Sadruddin Rahim Zindani (Deceased)

Punam Narayan Bhatia vs Vindribai Parshotamdas Alias Vindribai Parshotamdas Bhatia (Deceased)

Smita Prakash Shirke vs Savitri Mahadeo Vichare (Deceased)

Shridhan Vinayak Nayak vs Alka Vinayak Nayak