Arjun Malji Vaijal and 6 Ors. vs Harichandra Rupaji Alise Rupji Khulat — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Arjun Malji Vaijal and 6 Ors. vs Harichandra Rupaji Alise Rupji Khulat — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the Grant dated 28.07.2023 (Letters of Administration) issued in favour of the Respondent should be revoked.

Court's answer

In Testamentary proceedings, the Court does not determine entitlement, right, title or interest of the parties in immovable properties belonging to the deceased.

Ratio / Principle

Letters of Administration per se require the Grantees to administer the estate of the deceased.

Key takeaways

Where there are disputes in respect of entitlement, the parties are free to approach the Civil Court of appropriate original jurisdiction for agitating their title grievances.ratio¶6
Any dispute relating to immovable property, whether already pending or hereafter filed before any forum, shall be decided strictly on its own merits and in accordance with law.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction, High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Milind N. Jadhav, J.; 26 September 2025) — Miscellaneous Petition No. 62 of 2025 in Testamentary Petition No. 4553 of 2022. Petitioners, legal heirs of the real brother of the deceased Sakhribai Rupaji @ Rupji Khulat (expired 09.06.1987), sought revocation of the Grant dated 28.07.2023 — Letters of Administration having been allowed and granted on 23.06.2023 in favour of the Respondent, son of the deceased — alleging that the Grant was being used in Revenue proceedings by successors-in-title of the deceased. The Respondent contended that the Petitioners had no caveatable interest; the submissions were noted by the Court. Held, disposing of the Petition: (i) in Testamentary proceedings the Court does not determine entitlement, right, title or interest of the parties in the immovable properties of the deceased; (ii) Letters of Administration per se require the Grantee to administer the estate, and parties disputing entitlement are free to approach the Civil Court of appropriate original jurisdiction for agitating their title grievances; (iii) any dispute relating to immovable property, whether pending or hereafter filed before any forum, shall be decided strictly on its own merits and in accordance with law. Miscellaneous Petition disposed.

71.MPT.62.2025.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.62 OF 2025 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.4553 OF 2022

Sakhribai Rupaji @ Rupji Khulat (Nee Kakadibai Ravji Vaijal)

Ravji Vaijal) .. Deceased ArjunMalji Vaijal and Ors. .. Petitioners Versus Harichandra Rupaji @ Rupji Khulat .. Respondent

Mr. Rohan Cama a/w. Mr. Aseem Naphade, Advocates i/by Mr. Sachin Kadam for Petitioners.

Mr. Nirman Sharma a/w. Mr. Rishar Singh Deeshank Doshi, Advocates i/by Mr. Shivaji Nirmale for Respondent.

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2025

P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Cama, learned Advocate for Petitioners and Mr.

Sharma, learned Advocate for Respondent.

2. Petition is filed for revocation of Grant dated 28.07.2023. Letters of Administration was allowed and granted and granted by the Court on 23.06.2023 in respect of property and credits of deceased Sakhribai Rupaji @ Rupji Khulat (Nee Kakadibai Ravji Vaijal) who expired on 09.06.1987. Respondent is son of deceased. Grant was issued in his favour.

3. Petitioner before me are legal heirs of the real brother of deceased. One of the grievance which is advanced by Mr. Cama which

1 of 2

71.MPT.62.2025.doc

can be seen from page No.107 is that the Grant is used in Revenue proceedings by successors-in-title of the deceased.

4. Mr. Sharma in response to Mr. Cama’s submission would submit that Respondent is son of deceased and Petitioners before Court have no caveatable interest. The submissions made by Mr. Sharma are noted by the Court.

5. This Court needs to clarify that in Testamentary proceedings,

the Court does not determine entitlement, right, title or interest of the parties in immovable properties belonging to deceased.

6. Letters of Administration per se require the Grantees to administer the estate of the deceased. If there are any disputes in respect of entitlement, parties are free to approach the Civil Court of appropriate original jurisdiction for agitating their title grievances.

7. Needless to state any dispute relating to immovable property before any forum if pending or if shall be filed, the same shall be decided strictly on its own merits and in accordance with law.

8. In view of the above, Miscellaneous Petition stands disposed.

H. H. SAWANT

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed by HARSHADA HARSHADA HANUMANT HANUMANT SAWANT SAWANT Date: 2025.09.27 11:41:03 +0530

2 of 2