Eton Bosco Pinto vs Lulu Pinto S/O Sebastin Pinto — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

Eton Bosco Pinto vs Lulu Pinto S/O Sebastin Pinto — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner (Eton Bosco Pinto) for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, subject to (i) the petitioner filing an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period and (ii) the office verifying, before issuance of the grant, that no cross petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition is filed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, being the son of the deceased, is entitled to be granted Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of the properties left by the deceased. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitioner, being the son of the deceased, is entitled to seek Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925; the facts stated on oath by the petitioner and the heirs of the deceased remained unchallenged and were required to be accepted.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

The petition was allowed and Letters of Administration ordered to be granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format, as per the Indian Succession Act, 1925.ratio¶¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Testamentary Petition 43.TP/5448/2024, Bombay High Court (Testamentary Department), decided 17th February, 2025 by Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty. Petition by Eton Bosco Pinto, son of the deceased Lulu Pinto s/o Sebastian Pinto (died 12/09/2018 at Kuwait), for Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of scheduled properties. Citation duly affixed on the High Court and Collector's Office notice boards, 14 days expiring vide Rule 397(1) and (4), and notice issued to the Collector vide Rule 396, of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980; delay explained vide Rule 382. Legal heirs consented by affidavits without reserving rights; administration bond in prescribed Form No. 118 filed with surety. Nobody resisted the claim and no pending litigation was brought to notice, so the petition was treated as uncontested. Held: the petitioner, being the son of the deceased, is entitled to Letters of Administration and the petition was allowed; the grant is subject to the petitioner filing an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath and to office verification, before issuance of the grant, that no cross petition is pending and no caveat resisting the petition is filed.

1 43.TP/5448/2024

Before :Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 17th February, 2025

FOR COMPLIANCE:

TP/5448/2024 P. Ms. Aananya Danial i/b ANB LEGAL Ld. Advocate for the C. : Petitioner

[Original]

(ECHCBM0205564 1) This is a petition for grant of Letters of 2024) Administration, under the Provisions of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”) for the properties left by the deceased, namely Lulu Pinto s/o Sebastian Pinto (For short “Said deceased”). The petitioner, namely Eton Bosco Pinto, has filed documents.

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.

Said deceased died as a married on 12/09/2018 at Kuwait 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.

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 treated as

2 43.TP/5448/2024

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, inter-se.

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 Indian Succession Act, 1925, 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.

17th February, 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department