Allowed¶19

Abhijit Prakash Rakhe v. Prakash Gajanan Rakhe

Bombay HC15 Jul 2025TP/3101/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court testamentary judgment dated 17 December 2025 granting Letters of Administration with Will annexed to petitioner Anirudha Prakash Rakhe under Will of testator Prakash Gajanan Rakhe (died 26-05-2024). Key terms: probate / testamentary / letters of administration with will annexed / Hindu Succession Act 1956 / Rule 397(1)(4) and Rule 396 / Rule 383 compliance / Form No.102 witness affidavit / uncontested petition / administration bond / consent of legal heirs and co-legatee Pratima Prakash Rakhe / effect throughout State of Maharashtra.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration with Will annexed granted to petitioners, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra. ¶19

Abhijit Prakash Rakhe vs Prakash Gajanan Rakhe — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

1 118.TP/3101/2025

¶2

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date: 17th December 2025

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

) 118. TP/3101/2025 ) Ms. Swapna Gokhale Ld. Advocate for the (AMH20230053748C202400016) ) with Petitioner ) WILL/1195/2025 )

¶5

P.C.:

¶6

1) Petitioners, namely Anirudha Prakash Rakhe, filed this petition, being the legatee as well as being constituted power of attorney of Abhijit Prakash Rakhe, a one of the legatee, under the Will executed by Prakash Gajanan Rakhe (herein after the same is referred to as “Testator”), for the grant of a Letters of Administration with Will annexed. The Said Testator said to have died at Mumbai on 26-05-2024.

¶7

2) Perused petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for the petitioner. Perused documents. Petitioners, filed the copy of death certificate, an identity proof of the testator, Will, along with its translation & petitioner's oath.

¶8

3) No executor has been appointed under the Will. Hence, the petition is tenable.

¶9

4) Petitioner stated that the deceased left behind her last Will and Testament, which was duly executed at Pune on 17.11.2021, in Marathi language. In view of the Order of the Hon’ble Court passed in the TP No. 1263/2023, the Ld. The advocate for the petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that the translation of the Will is a true translation as per the contents of the Original Will. The Will is handed over separately for being filed and kept in a safe place in the Office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.

¶10

5) Ld. The advocate for the petitioner submits that the testator is survived by legal heirs, whose details are given in the petition’s paragraph No. 08, as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The petitioner affirmed that there are no other legal heirs of the deceased, except as mentioned in the petition. Legal heirs of the testator have consented to the petition and thereby waived the service of Citation.

¶11

6) 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

¶12

2 118.TP/3101/2025

¶13

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.

¶14

7) The petitioner has filed the affidavit of Aditi Paritosh Gombi one of attesting Witnesses to the Will, in form No.102 of Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. She deposed that deceased signed the Testament in her presence. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will. According to her all additions and alteration in a Will were existed at the time of execution before signing the Will. Hence, there is sufficient compliance of the Rule 383 of the Rules.

¶15

8) Properties mentioned in the schedule-I of the petition are referred in the Will.

¶16

9) Other legatee, namely Pratima Prakash Rakhe, has given consent to grant Letters of Administration to petitioner. Petitioners have executed the administration Bond in the prescribed format. Hence, following order:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

1) Petition is granted.

¶19

2) Office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioners as per the Rules, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra.

¶20

3) Before issuance of Letters of Administration with Will, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is filed. Office to act accordingly.

¶21

17th December 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

¶22

17th December 2025

Abhijit Prakash Rakhe v. Prakash Gajanan Rakhe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhijit Prakash Rakhe v. Prakash Gajanan Rakhe

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kabir Ashok Lulla vs Thakur Lachman Lulla (Deceased)

Gregory Peter Noronha vs Roman Nascimento Silveir Alias Roman Nascimento Silvera (Deceased)

Vinayak Bhalchandra Deo vs Kamal Bhalchandra Deo (Deceased)

Caneez Fatima Mirza vs hidayath ali mirza

Ami Pramod Patel. vs Suresh Atamaram Patel

Sushana Bhuvnesh Bahri and Meghna Raghav Maria vs Shakuntala Shashii Bhushan Was Deceased