Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal vs Kalawati Radheshyam Agarwal — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal vs Kalawati Radheshyam Agarwal — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted; dismissal accompanied by directions permitting the Applicant to obtain inspection of specifically identified documents from the Plaintiff's counsel.

Issue for consideration

Whether prayer clause (a) — disclosure on oath of the assets and property forming part of the deceased's assets with supporting documents and a true and correct account of the dealings — should be granted against the Plaintiff. +1 more

Court's answer

Prayer clause (a) is misconceived: in exercising testamentary jurisdiction the Court is concerned only with the validity and authenticity of the Will of which probate is sought.

Ratio / Principle

Any question of right, title and interest in the property lies outside the purview of the testamentary Court, and therefore the prayer clause (a) relief cannot be granted.

Key takeaways

A blanket inspection prayer made without identifying the specific documents whose inspection was sought and not given cannot be entertained.ratio¶16
In the absence of specific particulars, the blanket relief sought under prayer clause (b) cannot be granted.ratio¶16
The Applicant is left at liberty to communicate with the Plaintiff's Advocate setting out the specific documents whose inspection was sought and not given, in which case inspection will be given by the Plaintiff's counsel; with these directions the Interim Application is dismissed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction), Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J., 07.03.2026 — Interim Application No. 2893 of 2025 in Testamentary Suit No. 24 of 2017 (Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal v. Kalawati Radheshyam Agarwal) DISMISSED. (i) Prayer for disclosure on oath of the deceased's assets, supporting documents and a true and correct account of dealings held misconceived: in testamentary jurisdiction the Court is concerned only with the validity and authenticity of the Will of which probate is sought; questions of right, title and interest in property fall outside its purview. (ii) Blanket prayer for inspection of documents relied upon by the Plaintiff refused for want of specific particulars; Applicant directed to communicate to the Plaintiff's Advocate the particular documents whose inspection was sought and not given, upon which inspection will be furnished.

2026:BHC-OS:6058

39 ia 2893-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2893 OF 2025 IN

TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 24 OF 2017

Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal ... Plaintiff. Versus Kalawati Radheshyam Agarwal ... Defendant.

Mr Divyang Shukla i/by L.T. Rao for Applicant. Udayan Jain a/w. Creesh Jain and Anay Jain for Plaintiff. Mr Jainish Jain for Defendant Nos.1 and 2.

Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : March 07, 2026

P.C. :

1. Interim Application has been preferred seeking disclosure on oath of the assets and property forming part of the deceased’s assets along with supporting documents, true and correct account of the dealings and inspection of documents relied upon by the Plaintiff in the suit.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that insofar as inspection is concerned, the inspection is not complete, which is disputed by learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff relying upon the covering letter recording that the inspection has been given.

1 of 2

sa_mandawgad

39 ia 2893-25.doc

3. Insofar as the prayer clause (a) is concerned, the relief sought is clearly misconceived as the Court in exercise of the testamentary jurisdiction is concerned only with the validity and authenticity of the Will of which probate is sought. The issue of any right, title and interest in the property is an issue outside the purview of the testamentary Court and hence the relief cannot be granted.

4. Insofar as the prayer clause (b) is concerned, a blanket relief is sought without mentioning the documents of which inspection was sought and was not given. In the absence of any specific particulars, the blanket relief sought cannot be granted. It is open for the Applicant to communicate with the Advocate for the Plaintiff setting out the documents of which inspection was sought and was not given and in which case the inspection will be given by the learned counsel for the Plaintiff. With these directions, the Interim Application stands dismissed.

[Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

2 of 2

sa_mandawgad Signed by: Sanjay A. Mandawgad Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 09/03/2026 18:10:36