Disposed¶21

Vandana Padmakar Korde v. Padmakar Shantaram Korde (Deceased)

Bombay HC30 Jul 2025TP/357/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Letters of Administration; administration bond; dispensation of administration bond; surety; testamentary petition; registered Will; consent affidavits by daughters/legal heirs; sole beneficiary; senior citizen petitioner; Officer on Special Duty order dated 22.04.2025; praecipe; Bombay High Court Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction; Milind N. Jadhav, J.; Padmakar Shantaram Korde; Vandana Padmakar Korde.

What did the court decide?

Dispensation of the administration bond/surety requirement (condition No. (3) of the order dated 22.04.2025); Department directed to proceed with issuance of the grant of Letters of Administration in accordance with law. ¶21

Vandana Padmakar Korde vs Padmakar Shantaram Korde (Deceased) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether condition No. (3) of the Officer on Special Duty's order dated 22.04.2025, requiring execution of an administration bond/surety to secure the interests of the other legatees, should be dispensed with so that the grant of Letters of Administration may issue to the Petitioner.

¶12

Court's answer

No purpose would be achieved by insisting upon the administration bond or surety to secure the interest of the other legatees, since both legal heirs apart from the Petitioner (the deceased's daughters) had given their full and free consent in her favour, the Petitioner is the sole beneficiary of the entire estate, and she is a senior citizen with certain expressed exigencies.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Condition No. (3) in the order dated 22.04.2025 stands dispensed with.

¶16

Key takeaways

The Department is directed to proceed further for issuance of the grant in accordance with law.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction), Milind N. Jadhav, J. — Testamentary Petition No. 357 of 2025, decided 11.09.2025: Where the widow of the testator, who is the sole beneficiary under his duly registered Will, sought Letters of Administration, and his two daughters — the only other legal heirs — filed consent affidavits giving their full and free consent in her favour, the Court held that no purpose would be achieved by insisting upon an administration bond or surety to secure the interests of the other legatees, particularly as the Petitioner is a senior citizen with certain expressed exigencies. Condition No. (3) of the Officer on Special Duty's order dated 22.04.2025 (requiring execution of an administration bond) was dispensed with, and the Department was directed to proceed further for issuance of the grant in accordance with law. Praecipe disposed.

¶1

P6. TP-357-25.docx

¶2

Amberkar

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

¶5

TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 357 OF 2025

¶6

Padmakar Shantaram Korde .. Deceased

¶7

Vandana Padmakar Korde .. Petitioner

¶8

Mr. Graham Francis i/by Mr. Vishwanath Talkute, Advocates for Petitioner

¶9

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 11, 2025

¶10

P. C.:

¶11

1. Not on board. Mentioned by way of filing a praecipe dated 11.09.2025.

¶12

2. Heard Mr. Francis, learned Advocate for Petitioner. He would submit that Petition is filed for seeking Letters of Administration of the last Will and Testament of Padmakar Shantaram Korde, the deceased by his wife. He would submit that deceased expired on 01.11.2020. Petitioner is the widow of deceased. He would submit that all objections have been duly complied with save and except the fact that by order dated 22.04.2025, learned Officer on Special Duty has opined that in view of the interest of other legatees involved, the same will have to be secured by way of execution of administration bond and therefore prayer for dispensation of administration bond has been rejected.

¶13

1 of 3

¶14

P6. TP-357-25.docx

¶15

3. It is seen that deceased is survived by Petitioner (wife) and his 2 daughters. Both daughters have filed their consent affidavits which are appended at page Nos. 76 to 80 of the Petition. They have given their consent in favour of Petitioner who is their mother. It is also seen that Petitioner is the sole beneficiary to the entire estate of the deceased. It is also seen that Petitioner is residing in Pune. It is seen that deceased had left a Will which is duly registered for which present Petition has been filed for seeking Letters of Administration. It is seen that both daughters of Petitioner and deceased have given their full and free consent in favour of Petitioner. In that view of the matter, request made by Mr. Francis in the facts and circumstances of the present case deserves to be granted.

¶16

4. Administration bond or surety is taken to ensure that all heirs receive their share on administration. In the present case, both legal heirs apart from Petitioner who are daughters of deceased have given their full and free consent in favour of Petitioner. There are certain exigencies expressed by Petitioner who is a senior citizen. In view thereof, I am of the opinion that no purpose will be achieved by insisting upon the administration bond or surety to secure the interest of the other legatees in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Hence, condition No. (3) in the order dated 22.04.2025 stands

¶17

2 of 3

¶18

P6. TP-357-25.docx

¶19

dispensed with. Department is directed to proceed further for

¶20

issuance of grant in accordance with law.

¶21

5. Praecipe is disposed.

¶22

Amberkar