Altaf Hussain Adul Rehman Chikhalia vs Mariyam Bi Shaikh (Deceased) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Altaf Hussain Adul Rehman Chikhalia vs Mariyam Bi Shaikh (Deceased) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner (Altaf Hussain Abdul Rehman Chikhalia), as per the Rules, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra; issuance conditioned on the Office verifying that no cross-petition is pending or caveat filed.

Issue for consideration

Whether Letters of Administration with Will annexed should be granted to the petitioner, the sole beneficiary under the Will, no executor having been appointed under the Will. +2 more

Court's answer

Since no executor was appointed under the Will and the petitioner is the legatee under the Will, the petition is tenable.

Ratio / Principle

Enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will; the petitioner has succeeded in proving execution through the affidavit/deposition of witness Mumtaz Mustaq Patel, who attested that the deceased affixed her thumb impression on the Testament in his presence.

Key takeaways

All additions and alterations in the Will existed at the time of execution, and the contents of the Will were read over to the Testatrix by Advocate & Notary G.M. Bhoir at the time of execution; hence there is sufficient compliance of Rule 383 & 419 of the Rules.ratio¶15
It was found, per the petitioner's affirmation in paragraph Nos. 08 and 8A and detailed Rider-I, that the Testatrix is survived by no legal heir under the Personal Laws applicable to the deceased.ratio¶11
Despite publication and affixture of citations and notice to the Collector, till that day no one appeared to resist the petitioner's claim and nothing was brought to notice regarding pending litigation over the same properties; hence the petition was treated as uncontested.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Testamentary Department (Shri P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty), by order dated 14th October, 2025 in 87.TP/5662/2024 (with WILL/2270/2024), granted Letters of Administration with Will annexed to Altaf Hussain Abdul Rehman Chikhalia, sole beneficiary under the Will of Mariyam Bi W/o. Gulam Ali Ismail Shaikh (died at Mumbai on 29-01-2018; Will duly executed at Mumbai on 29.07.2017 in English). With no executor appointed, the petitioner as legatee made the petition tenable. Execution was proved by the affidavit of witness Mumtaz Mustaq Patel in Form No.102 (thumb impression affixed in his presence; additions/alterations existing at execution; contents read over by Advocate & Notary G.M. Bhoir), showing sufficient compliance of Rules 383 & 419. Delay was explained under Rule 382; citations were published (Free Press Journal English; Mumbai Urdu News Urdu, 12.09.2025) under precautionary Chamber Order No. 366 of 2025 with affidavit of service under Rule 400; citation was affixed on the High Court and Collector's Office notice boards with 14 days expiring under Rule 397(1) and (4), and notice went to the Collector under Rule 396. No one resisted; the petition was uncontested and the administration bond was executed. Letters of Administration were directed to issue for the whole State of Maharashtra after verification that no cross-petition or caveat was pending.

1 87.TP/5662/2024

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date: 14th October, 2025

FOR COMPLIANCE:

TP/5662/2024 ) Shri. A K Kharwar Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner with ) WILL/2270/2024 )

P.C.:

This petition is filed by the petitioner, being the sole beneficiary under the Will executed by Mariyam Bi W/o. Gulam Ali Ismail Shaikh (herein after the same is referred to as “Testatrix”), for the grant of a Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Said Testatrix said to have died at Mumbai on 29-01-2018. Petitioner namely Altaf Hussain Abdul Rehman Chikhalia, filed the copy of death certificate, identity proof of the testator, Will & petitioner's oath.

Perused petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for the petitioner. Perused documents.

The petitioner has explained the delay vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rule, 1980(for short “Rules”).

No executor has been appointed under the Will. The petitioner is the legatee under the Will. Hence, the petition is tenable.

Petitioner stated that the deceased left behind her last Will and Testament, which was duly executed at Mumbai on 29.07.2017, in English language. The Will is handed in separately for being filed and kept in a safe place in the Office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.

Ld. The advocate for the petitioner submits that the Testatrix is survived by No legal heir and such averment has been made in paragraph No. 08 and 8A as well as vide Rider-I, of the petition, as per the provisions of Muslim Personal Laws. The petitioner affirmed that there are no other legal heirs of the deceased, except as mentioned in the petition. Rider-I is specific and in detail. It is stated that the deceased has no heirs from these categories, as per the Personal Laws, applicable to the deceased.

The petitioner, in addition to the regular service, as a precaution, has taken out a Chamber Order, having No. 366 of 2025, to serve the All Concern Citation publishing in the daily newspaper namely, Free Press Journal (English) and Mumbai Urdu News (Urdu) on 12.09.2025. Accordingly, affidavit of service has been filed by the Ld. Advocate for the petitioner regarding service vide Rule 400 of the Rules. However, no one appeared to resist the petition.

2 87.TP/5662/2024

Citation was issued, which has been duly affixed on the conspicuous part 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 uncontested one.

The petitioner has filed the affidavit of Mumtaz Mustaq Patel one of Witnesses to the Will, in form No.102 of Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. He deposed that deceased has affixed her thumb the Testament in his presence. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will. According to him all additions and alteration in a Will were existed at the time of execution and contents of the Will were read over to the testatrix by Advocate & Notary G.M. Bhoir before at the time of execution of the Will. Hence, there is sufficient compliance of the Rule 383 & 419 of the Rules.

Properties mentioned in the schedule-I of the petition are referred in the Will.

Petitioner has executed the administration Bond in the prescribed format. Hence, following order:

ORDER

1) Petition is granted.

2) Office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner, as per the Rules, having effect throughout State of Maharashtra.

3) Before issuance of Letters of Administration with Will, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is filed. Office to act accordingly.

14th October, 2025 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department

14th October, 2025