Allowed

Tarunkumar Agarwal v. Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal (Deceased)

Bombay HC3 Apr 2024TP/79/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a petition for Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act. The petitioner, a son of the deceased, filed the petition supported by heirs' consent and necessary documents. The court found the matter uncontested and granted the administration based on presented facts.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Letters of Administration granted to petitioner for deceased's properties shown in schedule in prescribed format.

Tarunkumar Agarwal vs Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 59.TP/79/2024

¶2

Before : Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 19th April, 2024

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/79/2024 P. Ms. Apeksha Khetan i/b I C Legal Ld. Advocate for the C. : (ECHCBM021636 Petitioner 42023)

¶5

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 Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Tarunkumar Agarwal, 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. 2) I have heard Ld. Advocate and perused the petition along with the documents.

¶6

Said deceased died Married on 02-04-2016 at Mumbai leaving behind him 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. Deceased left properties shown in the schedule. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

¶7

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.

¶8

Legal heirs of the deceased have consented by way of

¶9

2 59.TP/79/2024

¶10

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

¶11

Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in view of provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the petitioner, being Son of the deceased, is 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:

¶12

ORDER

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

1. 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.

¶16

19th April, 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Tarunkumar Agarwal v. Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarunkumar Agarwal v. Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal (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

Abdul Razzak Abdul Aziz Jodhatar vs Abdul Aziz Adam Jodhatar (Deceased)

Raj Ramchand Makhija vs Manoharlal Bhagwandas Makhija (Deceased)

Anand Bharat Shah vs Parimal Dhirajlal Shah (Deceased)

Rutesh Madhukar Jadhav vs Late Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar(Deceased)

Bhaskar Dattaraya Ghangurde vs Dattaraya Raghunath Ghangurde (Deceased)

Suhasini Subhash Gawade @ Jyotsna Gopal Parab vs Sangeeta Gopal Parab (Deceased)