Anita Mary John vs Esther John W O Late Mannoor… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

Anita Mary John vs Esther John W O Late Mannoor… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioners for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format, effective throughout the State of Maharashtra under the Indian Succession Act, 1925; petitioners to file the account as undertaken in their Oath within the stipulated period; before issuance of the grant, the office to verify that no cross-petition is pending or caveat resisting the petition is filed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, being daughters of the deceased Esther John, are entitled to be granted Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the properties left by the deceased.

Court's answer

No one appeared to resist the petitioners' claim and nothing was brought to the court's notice regarding pending litigation about the same properties; the petition was therefore treated as uncontested.

Ratio / Principle

Facts stated by the petitioners on oath remained unchallenged, were required to be accepted, and the petition deserved to be allowed as prayed for.

Key takeaways

All the legal heirs of the deceased being petitioners (in view of the order in TP No. 2918/2023), they were exempted from furnishing the surety bond.ratio¶10
Letters of Administration were granted to the petitioners for the properties left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, having effect throughout the State of Maharashtra, as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Testamentary Department (Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty), 29th January 2026, in TP 59.TP/5897/2025: Petitioners Anita Mary John and Savita John, daughters of the deceased Esther John (who died unmarried-status recorded as married on 08-05-2016 at Bhutan), sought Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the properties in Schedule I of the petition. Citation was published on the High Court and Collector's Office (Mumbai) notice boards and 14 days expired per Rule 397(1) and (4) of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980; the Collector was noticed per Rule 396; delay was explained vide Rule 382. No one opposed and no pending litigation concerning the properties was brought to notice, so the petition was treated as uncontested. Relying on the order in TP No. 2918/2023, all legal heirs being petitioners, they were exempted from furnishing the surety bond. The court held that the sworn facts stood unchallenged, allowed the petition, and granted Letters of Administration effective throughout the State of Maharashtra, subject to the petitioners filing the account undertaken in their Oath and office verification, before issuance of the grant, that no cross-petition or caveat is pending.

1 59.TP/5897/2025

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date 29th January 2026

FOR COMPLIANCE:

TP/5897/2025 ) Ms. Shivangi Mukharjee i/b M G Legal Ld. ) (AMH20250006142C2025000 Advocate for the Petitioner ) 07)

P.C.:

Petitioners, namely (1) ANITA MARY JOHN & (2) SAVITA JOHN, 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 ESTHER JOHN, W/o Late Mannoor George John,(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 08-05-2016 at Bhutan leaving behind her legal heirs, shown in the paragraph No. 7 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.

In view of the Order, passed in the TP No. 2918/2023, all the legal heirs of the deceased are petitioners, and therefore, they are exempted from furnishing the surety Bond.

Ld. Advocate for the petitioners submitted that in view of provisions of the the

2 59.TP/5897/2025

Indian Succession Act, 1925, the petitioners, being daughters of the deceased, is entitled to seek a Letters of Administration. Hence, facts stated by the petitioners, 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 petitioners 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 petitioners 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,

29th January 2026 Officer on Special Duty, with the Testamentary Department