Sameet Subhash Kotwal vs Subhash Narayan Kotwal — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

Sameet Subhash Kotwal vs Subhash Narayan Kotwal — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Letters of Administration granted to petitioner Sameet Subhash Kotwal for the properties left by the deceased Subhash Narayan Kotwal and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format, with effect throughout the State of Maharashtra under the Indian Succession Act, 1925; petitioner to file an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period; office to verify absence of any cross-petition or caveat before issuance of the grant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Sameet Subhash Kotwal, son of the deceased, is entitled to be granted Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the properties left by the deceased Subhash Narayan Kotwal.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

The petition was allowed and Letters of Administration were granted to the petitioner for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

Key takeaways

The petitioner is directed to file an account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period.ratio¶16
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.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Testamentary Department — Testamentary Petition 80.TP/285/2026, decided 12th March, 2026 by Shri P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, with the Testamentary Department. Petitioner Sameet Subhash Kotwal applied under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for Letters of Administration to the properties left by deceased Subhash Narayan Kotwal, who died as a married on 02-05-2021 at Mumbai, survived by the legal heirs shown in paragraph 4 of the petition, with properties set out in Schedule I; delay explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules. Citation was issued and affixed on the Notice Board of the Hon'ble High Court and the Collector's Office, Mumbai; 14 days expired vide Rule 397(1) and (4) and notice went to the Collector vide Rule 396 of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980; nobody appeared and the petition was treated as uncontested. The legal heir consented by Affidavit without reserving any right, and the Administration Bond in prescribed Form No. 118 with surety was filed. On Ld. Advocate Tushar Ambrekar's submission under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 that the petitioner, being son of the deceased, was entitled to apply, the court held that the unchallenged facts stated on oath stood accepted and allowed the petition: Letters of Administration granted with effect throughout the State of Maharashtra, subject to filing of the account as undertaken in the Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period and office verification that no cross-petition or caveat is pending before issuance of the grant.

1 80.TP/285/2026

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date 12th March, 2026

FOR COMPLIANCE:

TP/285/2026 ) Shri. Tushar Ambrekar Ld. Advocate for the ) (AMH20240127674C2025000 Petitioner ) 48)

P.C.:

Petitioner, namely Sameet Subhash Kotwal, has applied for the grant of Letters of Administration, under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short “IS Act”), for the properties left by the deceased, namely Subhash Narayan Kotwal(For short “Said deceased”).

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

Said deceased died as a married on 02-05-2021 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. The deceased left properties shown in Schedule I of the petition. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

Office issued Citation to all concern and same has been 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”). An affidavit to that effect has been filed. Notice to the collector has been issued vide Rule 396 of the BHC Rules. Till today, no one has appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner, nor has anything been brought to the notice regarding pending litigation about the same properties. Hence, the petition is treated as an uncontested one.

Legal heir of the deceased has consented by way of Affidavit to grant the prayer of the petitioner to grant a Letter of Administration, without reserving any right. The legal heir has accepted the facts regarding their relationship, inter se.

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

2 80.TP/285/2026

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 the petitioner and heirs of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, the 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 the prescribed format, having effect throughout the state of Maharashtra as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

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

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

Officer on Special Duty,

12th March, 2026 Officer on Special Duty, with the Testamentary Department