Omprakash Agarwal vs Taramati Omprakash Agarwal — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

Omprakash Agarwal vs Taramati Omprakash Agarwal — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Grant of Letters of Administration with Will annexed to petitioner Vikaschand Agarwal alias Vikas Omprakash Agarwal, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra, with the Office directed to verify, before issuance, that no cross-petition is pending or caveat is filed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition remains tenable for grant of Letters of Administration with Will annexed notwithstanding the death of the named executor, given that the petitioner is one of the legatees under the Will. +3 more

Court's answer

Since the executor Omprakash Agarwal died on 30.09.2024 (death certificate on record) and the petitioner is one of the legatees under the Will, the court found the petition tenable.

Ratio / Principle

On the affidavit of attesting witness Kailashchand Hukumchand Agarwal (filed in Form No.102) deposing that the Testatrix signed the Testament in his presence in a sound state of mind, and that its contents were read over to her before signing, the court found enough evidence on record to accept the execution of the Will as proved, evidencing sufficient compliance of Rule 419.

Key takeaways

The court recorded that the petitioner explained the delay vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980.ratio¶9
With citation duly affixed at the High Court and the Collector's Office notice board, Mumbai, 14 days expired, notice issued to the Collector vide Rule 396, and no one appearing to resist the claim nor any pending litigation regarding the scheduled properties reported, the court treated the petition as uncontested.ratio¶15
The court granted the petition and directed the Office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner, as per the Rules, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra, subject to the Office first verifying that no cross-petition is pending or caveat is filed before issuance.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Testamentary) — 93.TP/2954/2024 [Original] (ECHCBM02085232023) with WILL/1187/2024, decided 27th March, 2026 by Shri P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty with the Testamentary Department. Petitioner Vikaschand Agarwal alias Vikas Omprakash Agarwal, one of the legatees, sought Letters of Administration with Will Annexed to the last Will of Taramati Omprakash Agarwal (“Testatrix”), executed at Mumbai on 02.02.2012 in English; the Testatrix died at Mumbai on 02-03-2012. The named executor, Omprakash Agarwal, died on 30.09.2024 (certificate filed); as petitioner is one of the legatees, the petition was held tenable. Execution of the Will was proved through the affidavit of attesting witness Kailashchand Hukumchand Agarwal in Form No.102, deposing that the Testatrix signed in his presence in a sound state of mind and that its contents were read over to her before signing (Rule 419 compliance deemed sufficient). Delay in filing was explained vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. Citation (Rule 397(1) and (4)) was affixed at the High Court and the Collector's Office notice board, Mumbai, and expired after 14 days; notice to the Collector vide Rule 396 drew no objection and no pending litigation concerning the scheduled properties was reported, so the petition was treated as uncontested. Co-legatee Ruchika Agarwal consented to the grant and the petitioner executed the administration bond. Petition granted; Office directed to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra, after verifying that no cross-petition or caveat is pending. The petitioner affirmed himself the only heir of the deceased per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (husband Omprakash Hukumchand Agrawal died 30.09.2024; Omprakash's mother Laxmidevi Agarwal died 11.09.2019).

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner filed the copy of the death certificate, an identity proof of the testator, the Will and petitioner's oath with the petition.¶8
Prior proceeding
Delay in filing the petition was explained vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980.¶9
Prior proceeding
The named executor Omprakash Agarwal died on 30.09.2024 and his death certificate has been filed on the record.¶10
Prior proceeding
The deceased left behind her last Will and Testament, duly executed at Mumbai on 02.02.2012 in English language; the Will was handed over separately to be filed and kept in a safe place in the Office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.¶11
Prior proceeding
Testatrix survived by her husband and Son-Petitioner; Husband-Omprakash Hukumchand Agrawal died on 30.09.2024; Omprakash's mother Laxmidevi Agarwal died on 11.09.2019; petitioner affirmed as only heir of the deceased per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and that there are no other legal heirs except as mentioned in the petition.¶12
Prior proceeding
Citation to all concerned was issued and duly affixed on the conspicuous part of the Hon'ble High Court and the notice board of the Collector's Office at Mumbai, and 14 days expired vide Rule 397(1) and (4) of the BHC Rules; an affidavit to that effect has been filed.¶13
Prior proceeding
Notice to the Collector was issued vide Rule 396 of BHC Rules; till today no one appeared to resist the petitioner's claim and nothing was brought to the notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same properties; the petition was therefore treated as uncontested.¶15
Prior proceeding
Petitioner filed the affidavit of attesting witness Kailashchand Hukumchand Agarwal in Form No.102 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980; he deposed that the deceased signed the Testament in his presence and the testatrix was in a sound state of mind at execution, and that the contents of the Will were read over to the testatrix before signing, showing sufficient compliance of Rule 419.¶16
Prior proceeding
Properties mentioned in Schedule-I of the petition are referred to in the Will.¶17
Prior proceeding
Co-legatee Ruchika Agarwal consented to the grant of Letters of Administration to the petitioner; the petitioner executed the administration Bond in the prescribed format.¶18