Gautam Murlidhar Hattangadi vs 1) Murlidhar… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

Gautam Murlidhar Hattangadi vs 1) Murlidhar… — 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, under the Indian Succession Act, 1925; petitioner to file account as undertaken in Petitioner's Oath; office to verify absence of cross-petition/caveat before issuance of the grant.

Issue for consideration

Whether Letters of Administration should be granted to the petitioner (son of the deceased) under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the properties left by the two deceased, Murlidhar Bhavanishankar Hattangadi and Manini Murlidhar Hattangadi.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

As no one appeared to resist the petitioner's claim and nothing was brought to notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same properties, the petition was treated as uncontested.

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 must verify that no cross-petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition has been filed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Testamentary Petition 29.TP/428/2024 (Bombay High Court, Testamentary Department): Gautam Murlidhar Hattangadi, son of the deceased, sought Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for properties left by Murlidhar Bhavanishankar Hattangadi (died 06/03/2021 at Thane) and Manini Murlidhar Hattangadi (died 09/05/2020 at Thane). Compliance formalities completed: citation affixed on High Court and Collector's Office (Mumbai) notice boards with 14 days expiry [Rule 397(1) and (4), Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980]; notice to Collector [Rule 396]; delay explained [Rule 382]; legal heirs consented by affidavits without reserving any right; Administration Bond in prescribed Form No. 118 filed with surety. Counsel submitted that, per the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the son of the deceased was entitled to seek Letters of Administration. Finding: no one resisted the claim and no pending litigation on the same properties was reported; facts sworn on oath remained unchallenged and were accepted; petition treated as uncontested. Order dated 12th February 2025 (P. A. Jagdale, OSD): petition allowed and Letters of Administration granted; petitioner to file account as undertaken in his Oath; before issuance of grant, office to verify no cross-petition pending and no caveat filed.

1 29.TP/428/2024

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 12th February, 2025

FOR COMPLIANCE:

TP/428/2024 P. C. Ms. Sneha Chanotra Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner :

[Original]

(ECHCBM0212776 2023)

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 (1) Murlidhar Bhavanishankar Hattangadi and (2) Manini Murlidhar Hattangadi (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Gautam Murlidhar Hattangadi, has filed documents.

I have heard Ld. Advocate. I perused the documents, such as true copy of the death certificates of both the deceased, identity proofs of both the deceased, oath in the prescribed format, affidavit of service citation. Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner made a statement that bank account which is mentioned at serial no. 2 of the schedule is jointly held by the both the deceased. Hence, matter is taken for order.

Said deceased No. 1 died as widower on 06/03/2021 at Thane and deceased No. 2 died as married on 09/05/2020 at Thane leaving behind them legal heirs, shown in the paragraph No. 6 of the petition. Petitioner/s 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.

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

2 29.TP/428/2024

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 treated as uncontested one.

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.

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

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:

ORDER

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.

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

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.

12th February, 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department