Allowed¶15

Mandar Darshan Patil v. Darshan Baburao Patil

Bombay HC25 Jul 2025TP/3522/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Letters of Administration; Indian Succession Act, 1925; testamentary petition; Bombay High Court Testamentary Department; Mandar Darshan Patil; Darshan Baburao Patil; death 14-04-2021 Mumbai; uncontested petition; citation Rule 397(1) and (4); notice to Collector Rule 396; Rule 382 delay; administration bond Form No. 118; legal heirs consent affidavits; Hindu Succession Act, 1956; 93.TP/3522/2025; 16th October 2025; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner Mandar Darshan Patil for the properties left by the deceased Darshan Baburao Patil and shown in the schedule, subject to the petitioner filing an account as undertaken in the oath and to office verification, before issuance of the grant, that no cross-petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition has been filed.

Mandar Darshan Patil vs Darshan Baburao Patil — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether Letters of Administration should be granted to the petitioner, son of the deceased Darshan Baburao Patil, under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for the properties left by the deceased and shown in Schedule I of the petition.

¶5

Court's answer

The facts stated by the petitioner and the heirs of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and were required to be accepted; accordingly, the petition deserved to be allowed as prayed for.

¶13

Ratio / Principle

As no one appeared to resist the petitioner's claim, the petition was treated as an uncontested one.

¶10

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed and Letters of Administration are granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.ratio¶15
The petitioner is directed to file an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period.ratio¶16
Before issuance of the grant, the office is to verify that there is no cross-petition pending and no caveat resisting the petition has been filed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Testamentary petition (93.TP/3522/2025) under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 before the Bombay High Court, Testamentary Department (Officer on Special Duty, Shri. P. A. Jagdale), decided on 16th October, 2025. The petitioner, Mandar Darshan Patil, son of the deceased Darshan Baburao Patil (who died a married man on 14-04-2021 at Mumbai), sought Letters of Administration for the properties shown in Schedule I of the petition. Citation was affixed on the Notice Boards of the High Court and the Collector's Office, Mumbai, with 14 days expiring vide Rule 397(1) and (4) of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980; notice was issued to the Collector vide Rule 396; delay was explained vide Rule 382. No one appeared to resist the claim and the petition was treated as uncontested. Legal heirs consented by affidavits without reserving any right, and the petitioner filed the administration bond in prescribed Form No. 118 with surety. Holding the sworn facts unchallenged, the court allowed the petition and granted Letters of Administration, directing the petitioner to file an account as undertaken in the oath and requiring the office to verify absence of any cross-petition or caveat before issuance of the grant.

¶1

1 93.TP/3522/2025

¶2

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date 16th October, 2025

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/3522/2025 P. C. Shri. Harsh Gutka Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner : (AMH20250004425 C202500001)

¶5

Petitioner, namely MANDAR DARSHAN PATIL, has filed this petition for the grant of Letters of Administration, under the Provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”), for the properties left by the deceased, namely DARSHAN BABURAO PATIL, (For short “Said deceased”).

¶6

I have heard Ld. Advocate. I perused the documents, such as a true copy of the death certificate of the deceased, an identity proof of the deceased, an oath in the prescribed format, affidavit of service citation.

¶7

Said deceased died as a married on 14-04-2021 at Mumbai leaving behind him legal heirs, shown in the paragraph No. 7 of the petition. Petitioner states that there are no other legal heirs to the deceased, except heirs shown in the petition. The deceased left properties shown in Schedule I of the petition. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

¶8

Citation was issued, which has been duly affixed on the Notice Board 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 the collector has been issued vide Rule 396 of the BHC Rules. Till today, no one has appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner, nor has anything been brought to the notice regarding pending litigation about the same properties. Hence, the

¶9

2 93.TP/3522/2025

¶10

petition is treated as an uncontested one.

¶11

Legal heirs of the deceased have consented by way of Affidavits to grant the prayer of the petitioner to grant Letters of Administration, without reserving any right. Legal heirs have accepted the facts regarding their relationship, inter se.

¶12

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

¶13

Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in view of provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the petitioner, being Son of the deceased, is entitled to seek a Letters of Administration. Hence, facts stated by the petitioner and heirs of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed, as prayed for. Hence, following order:

¶14

ORDER

¶15

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 the prescribed format as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

¶16

1. The petitioner to file an account as undertaken in a Petitioner’s Oath within the stipulated period.

¶17

1. Before issuance of the grant, the office to verify that there is no cross-petition pending or caveat resisting the petition is filed.

¶18

16th October, 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with the Testamentary Department

Mandar Darshan Patil v. Darshan Baburao Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandar Darshan Patil v. Darshan Baburao Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sushma Anilkumar Jain vs Anilkumar Dulichand Jain (Deceased)

Rajesh Kumar Mukadam Rajbhar vs Singaridevi Mukadam Rajbhar (Deceased)

Bina Ishwar Badlani vs Ishwar Nanikram Badlani (Deceased)

Namita Prakash Parulekar vs Prakash Pandurang Parulekar

Nazeemuddin Moinuddin Syed vs Sayed Sharifa Bi Moinuddin

Rajesh Prabhakar Vagal vs Sunanda Dattatray Devrukhkar