Allowed¶17

Sharad Dattatray Raut v. Dattatray Ramchandra Raut (Deceased)

Bombay HC8 Jan 2025TP/3685/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Letters of Administration; Indian Succession Act 1925; testamentary petition; Bombay High Court Original Side; uncontested petition; Hindu Succession Act 1956; legal heirs consent affidavits; administration bond Form No. 118; citation publication Rule 397(1) and (4); notice to Collector Rule 396; delay explanation Rule 382; Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules 1980; deceased Dattatray Ramchandra Raut; petitioner Sharad Dattaray Raut; Mumbai; no caveat; no cross-petition; grant of administration; Vivek Sharma advocate.

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in prescribed format, as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. ¶17

Sharad Dattatray Raut vs Dattatray Ramchandra Raut… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in prescribed format, as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, son of the deceased Dattatray Ramchandra Raut, is entitled to grant of Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the properties left by the deceased.

¶7

Court's answer

No one appeared to resist the petitioner's claim and nothing was brought to the notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same properties; the petition is therefore treated as uncontested.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

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.

¶15

Key takeaways

Petition allowed; Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in prescribed format, as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.ratio¶17
The petitioner is directed to file an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period.ratio¶18
Before issuance of the grant, the office is to verify that no cross-petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition has been filed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Testamentary side — TP/3685/2024, decided 04th February, 2025 by Shri P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department. Uncontested petition under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by Sharad Dattaray Raut, son of the deceased Dattatray Ramchandra Raut (who died on 06/07/1997 at Mumbai), for Letters of Administration to the properties left by the deceased and shown in Schedule-I. Citation was affixed on the Notice Boards of the High Court and the Collector's Office, Mumbai, with the 14-day period expiring vide Rules 397(1) and (4) and notice to the Collector vide Rule 396 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980; no one appeared in opposition and no pending litigation was brought to notice, so the petition was treated as uncontested. The legal heirs consented by affidavits without reserving any right, the administration bond in prescribed form No. 118 with surety was filed, and delay was explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules. The court held that the facts stated on oath by the petitioner and the heirs remained unchallenged and were required to be accepted, allowed the petition, and granted Letters of Administration in prescribed format as per the Indian Succession Act, 1925, directing the petitioner to file an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period and directing the office, before issuance of the grant, to verify that no cross-petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition has been filed.

¶1

1 20.TP/3685/2024

¶2

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 04th February, 2025

¶3

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶4

TP/3685/2024 P. Shri. Vivek Sharma Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner C. :

¶5

[Original]

¶6

(ECHCBM021651 52023)

¶7

This is a petition for grant of Letters of Administration, under the Provisions of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”) for the properties left by the deceased, namely Dattatray Ramchandra Raut (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely SHARAD DATTARAY RAUT, has filed documents.

¶8

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

¶9

Said deceased died as a Married on 06/07/1997 at Mumbai leaving behind him legal heirs, shown in the paragraph No. 4 of the petition. Petitioner states that there are no other legal heirs to the deceased, except heirs shown in the petition. Deceased left properties shown in the schedule-I of the petition. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

¶10

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 collector has been issued vide Rule 396 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

¶11

2 20.TP/3685/2024

¶12

treated as uncontested one.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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 petitioner and heirs of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, petition deserves to be allowed, as prayed for. Hence, following order:

¶16

ORDER

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Officer on Special Duty,

¶21

04th February, 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

Sharad Dattatray Raut v. Dattatray Ramchandra Raut (Deceased)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharad Dattatray Raut v. Dattatray Ramchandra Raut (Deceased)

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

Akshay Ashok Ambelkar vs Rukmini Bai Alias Rukmini Pandurang Ambelkar (Deceased)

Maniben Dahyabhai Patel vs Harish Dahyabhai Patel (Deceased)

Jay Hitendra Shah vs Vandana Hirendra Shah (Deceased)

Kamlesh Dharmraj Singh vs Dharmraj Matar Singh

Dilip Rajkrishna Manucha through His Duly Constituted Attorney Ajit Jude Ireaneus Lobo vs Radha Rajkrishna Manucha (Deceased)

Raisahab S/o. Pratap Singh vs Pratap Bahadur Singh - Deceased