Allowed

Sameer Krishansarup Guliani v. Promila Krishansarup Guliani

Bombay HC16 Mar 2026TP/6442/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Testamentary petition TP/6442/2025, Bombay High Court, decided 16-03-2026 by P. A. Jagdale (Officer on Special Duty, Testamentary Department). Petitioner Sameer Kishansaroop Guliani sought Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for the estate of deceased Promila Krishansarup Guliani (widow, died 15-02-2021 at Mumbai). Uncontested grant: citation expired after 14 days (Rule

What did the court decide?

Letters of Administration granted to the petitioner Sameer Kishansaroop Guliani for the properties left by the deceased Promila Krishansarup Guliani and shown in Schedule I, in the prescribed format,

Sameer Krishansarup Guliani vs Promila… — Succession and Inheritance | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With the Testamentary Department Date 16th March, 2026

¶2

FOR COMPLIANCE:

¶3

TP/6442/2025 ) Shri. Priyank Kulkarni i/b D V Sawant Ld. ) (AMH20250004637C20250 Advocate for the Petitioner ) 0001)

¶4

P.C.:

¶5

Petitioner, namely Sameer Kishansaroop Guliani, 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 Promila Krishansarup Guliani,(For short “Said deceased”).

¶6

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.

¶7

Said deceased died as a Widow on 15-02-2021 at Mumbai leaving behind her 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

Legal heirs of the deceased have consented by way of Affidavits to grant the prayer of the petitioner to grant Letters of Administration, without reserving any right. Legal heirs have accepted the facts regarding their relationship, inter se.

¶10

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

¶11

surety.

¶12

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:

¶13

ORDER

¶14

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 India as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

1. Petitioner to correct the second and third dates in original administration bond and add title in administration bond and re-upload the same. Furthermore, corrections must be initialed by the petitioner, surety and notary.

¶18

16th March, 2026 Officer on Special Duty, with the Testamentary Department

Sameer Krishansarup Guliani v. Promila Krishansarup Guliani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer Krishansarup Guliani v. Promila Krishansarup Guliani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Veneet Balkrishen Mahajan vs Shakuntala Mahajan

Sital Gobindram Bellani vs Gobindram Wadhumal Bellani

Sonal Dipak Sanghani vs Chandrakant Rasiklal Sanghani

Vivek Surendranath Juneja vs Surendranath Juneja

Hirachand Ganeshmal Jain vs Ganeshmal Vanechand Jain

Pratibha Umesh Bandiwdekar vs Sadashiv Mahadeo Bandiwdekar alias Sadashiv mahadeo Bandivadekar (Deceased)