Allowed

Rutesh Madhukar Jadhav v. Late Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar(Deceased)

Bombay HC3 Apr 2024TP/841/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Testamentary petition by the sole beneficiary under the registered Will of Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar for Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Execution was proved by an attesting witness affidavit; legal heirs consented. The First Assistant Master granted the petition and directed issuance of Letters of Administration.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with Will annexed to be issued to the petitioner upon proper execution of the administration bond and verification that no caveat or cross-petition is pending.

Rutesh Madhukar Jadhav vs Late Mangala Sadashiv… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

SLG

¶2

BEFORE : MR. DILIP S. GURAV, FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER Date: 8^th May, 2024

¶3

CALLED FOR COMPLIANCE :

¶4

39 TP/841/2024 ) Ms. Shobhana Waghmare, Advocate for petitioner )

) P.C.: ) ) ) )

)

)

)

) ) )

)

) ) )

) ) ) )

)

) ) ) ) ) ) )

)

)

)

)

) ) ) )

1. Perused Petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for petitioner. This petition is fled by petitioner, being Sole benef i i ciary named under the Will executed by Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar (herein after the same is referred to as “Testatrix”), for grant of Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Testatrix said to have died on 5 th June, 2022 at Surat, Gujarat. 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-A-1), Will, petitioner's oath, afdavits fi of legal heirs of the testatrix.

¶21

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”).

¶22

3. The testatr i x has not appointed executor to execute the Will. The petitioner is being sole benef i ciary named under the Will. Hence, petition is tenable.

¶23

4. Petitioner stated that the testatrix left behind her last Will and Testament which was duly executed at Mumbai on 29th August, 2018 in Marathi language. Ld. Advocate for the petitioner has f i led her Afdavit dated 8 fi th April, 2024 and deposed that she has f i led the English Translation of the Marathi Will of the testatrix and certif i ed that she is familiar with both the language i.e. Marathi and English languages and have knowledge of both the languages. She further deposed that the Translation on record at Exhibit B- 1, at page 34 in the Petition, is true and correct. Hence, there is sufcient fi compliance of order dated 10 th January, 2024 passed by the Hon’ble Court in Testamentary Petition No. 1263 of 2023. The original Will is handed in separately for being f i led and kept in a safe place in the Ofce of the fi Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.

…..2

SLG

CONTD….

) 39 TP/841/2024 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

¶28

– 2 –

¶29

5. Petitioner states that parents and husband of testatrix were predeceased to her and testatrix was survived by legal heirs shown in the paragraph No.9 of the petition, as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Testatrix died leaving behind two sons namely Yeshwant Kumbhar and Devendra Kumbhar. Consent Afdavits of fi Yeshwant Kumbhar dated 2 nd November, 2023 and Devendra Kumbhar dated 8 th November, 2023 are on record. They have given their consents in the form of Afdavits, which fi are fled on the record by the petitioner i and consented for the issuance of Letters of Administration with Will annexed in favour of the petitioner without justifying any surety in respect of their shares in the estate of the testatrix. They have waived the service of Citation. The petitioner stated on oath that there are no other legal heirs of the testatrix other than mentioned in paragraph No. 9 of the petition.

¶30

6. Afdavit of Service of General Citation is f fi i led, stating that citation has been afxed on the Notice Board fi of the Hon’ble High Court, Bombay and notice board of the Collector’s ofce on fi 3rd April, 2024. Notice to collector has been sent.

¶31

7. The petitioner has f i led the afdavit of fi Amit Bhikaji Surve dated 2 nd November, 2023, one of Attesting Witnesses to the Will, in the Form No.102 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. Attesting witness deposed that he was present and testatrix signed on the Testament papers in presence of his and another witness. According to him, all additions and alteration, in a Will, were existed at the time of execution and before signing the Will. Hence, there is sufcient compliance of fi the Rule 383 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980 . Will is duly registered before Joint Sub Registrar, Mumbai City No.2 under registration No. 10757/18. Attesting Witness further deposed that at the time of execution of the Will, 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. ….3

¶32

SLG

¶33

CONTD…

¶34

) 39 TP/841/2024 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

¶35

08.05.2024

¶36

– 3 –

¶37

8. Properties mentioned in the Schedule I of the petition are referred in the Will. The Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that all properties and credits of which the testatrix died possessed or or entitled to at the time of her death, which were or are likely to come to her hands are mentioned in schedule- I of the petition.

¶38

9. Petitioner has executed the Administration Bond dated 4 th May, 2024, in the prescribed format with documentary proof of the surety. Hence, following order:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

1) Petition is granted.

¶41

2) Ofce fi to issue Letters of Administration with Will 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.

¶42

3) Before issuance of above said Letters of Administration with Will, the ofce to verify that there is fi no cross Petition is pending or caveat is fled. Of i ce to fi act accordingly.

¶43

FIRST ASSISTANT MASTER

Rutesh Madhukar Jadhav v. Late Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar(Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rutesh Madhukar Jadhav v. Late Mangala Sadashiv Kumbhar(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)

Bhaskar Dattaraya Ghangurde vs Dattaraya Raghunath Ghangurde (Deceased)

Tarunkumar Agarwal vs Sitaram Noratmal Agarwal (Deceased)

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