Partly allowed¶3

Madanraj Futermal Rathod v. Phulwanti Futermal Rathod (Deceased)

Bombay HC29 Jul 2025TP/3543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Testamentary petition amendment; TP/3543/2024; ECHCBM02103832024; WILL/1398/2024; praecipe dated 13.11.2025; suggested draft amendment; amendment allowed except clause IV; amendment within 03 weeks of uploading of order; consequential amendment allowed; online petition upload within 05 days; S.O. to 08.12.2025; Officer on Special Duty with Testamentary Department; Shri. P. A. Jagdale; Zulfiq Multani; Manoj Mishra; order dated 13.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Leave to amend the petition granted in terms of the suggested draft amendment, except the proposed amendment captioned “IV”; amendment (except clause IV) to be carried out within 03 weeks of uploading of the order; consequential amendments allowed; amended online petition to be uploaded within 05 days of amendment; matter stood over to 08.12.2025. ¶3

Madanraj Futermal Rathod vs Phulwanti Futermal Rathod (Deceased) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶3

Issue for consideration

Whether leave should be granted to the petitioner to amend the testamentary petition in terms of the suggested draft amendment annexed to the praecipe dated 13.11.2025.

¶3

Court's answer

The petitioner's application for amendment is accepted, the proposed amendment having been found relevant, except the proposed amendment captioned “IV”, which is not required to be stated in the petition.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to carry out the amendment, except clause No. (IV), within 03 weeks from the date of uploading of this order, if the petition is pending.

¶3

Key takeaways

Consequential amendment, if any, stands allowed.ratio¶3
In case of an online petition, the petitioner is to upload the amended petition within 05 days from the date of amendment.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order dated 13.11.2025 passed by Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department, in TP/3543/2024 (associated identifiers: ECHCBM02103832024; WILL/1398/2024): On the petitioner's praecipe dated 13.11.2025 seeking leave to amend the testamentary petition in terms of a suggested draft amendment, the Court found the proposed amendment relevant and accepted the submission, except the proposed amendment captioned “IV”, which was held not required to be stated in the petition. The petitioner was directed to carry out the amendment, except clause No. (IV), within 03 weeks from the date of uploading of the order, if the petition remained pending; consequential amendment, if any, was allowed; and, in case of an online petition, the amended petition was to be uploaded within 05 days from the date of amendment. Matter stood over (S. O.) to 08.12.2025.

¶1

Before : Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date :- 13^th November, 2025

¶2

FOR HEARING :

¶3

95. TP/3543/2024 [Original] (ECHCBM02103832024) with P. C. :	Shri. Zulfiq Multani i/b Manoj Mishra Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner
WILL/1398/2024	1. Heard Ld. Advocate for the petitioner. Petitioner seeks permission to amend the petition, in terms of the suggestedDraft amendment, annexed to the said praecipe, dated 13.11.2025. Proposed amendment is appeared to be relevant. Hence, submission is accepted, except proposed amendment captioned as “IV”, as it is not required to be stated in the petitioner.
	2. Hence, the petitioner to carry out an amendment,except clause No. (IV), withing period of03weeks from the date of uploading this order, if the petition is pending. Consequential amendment, if any, stands allowed. Furthermore, in case of online petition, the petitioner to upload the amended petition, within period of 05 days from the date of amendment.
	3. S. O. to 08.12.2025
13.11.2025	Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Madanraj Futermal Rathod v. Phulwanti Futermal Rathod (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madanraj Futermal Rathod v. Phulwanti Futermal Rathod (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kenneth Dennis Anthony D'Souza vs Mr. Julian Dsouza (Deceased)

Santosh Ramesh Chawathe vs Ramesh Gajanan Chawathe Alias R. Chawathe Alias Ramesh G. Chawathe (Deceased)

Vikram Singh S/O Balasaheb Sawant vs Gopichand S/O Kundlik Padalkar

Asif Abbas Jagrala vs Nurabhai Alias Noor Mohd Miyajibahi Jagarala (Deceased)

Kisan @ Krishna Vitthu Jadhav (Since Deceased (through Successors/Legal Heirs) 1.SUSHANT a Jadhav vs Ganpati Chandru Kumbhar (Since Deceased through Lrs 1.ANANT G Kumbhar) and Ors.

Siddharam Shrimant Bake vs Ramesh Namechand Shah and Anr.