one Sushila Bala Devi, the predecessor in interest of the petitioner. In that context, he further contended that said Sushila Bala Devi executed a will on 7th December, 2004 in favour of the petitioner in respect of the property including the property mentioned in the aforesaid partition suit. The petitioner initiated probate case being no. 10 of 2014 (which after getting contentions renumbered as OS47 of 2018 and subsequently again on transfer renumbered as 0S3 of 2019) which is now pending before learned Additional District Judge, North 24 parganas, Barshirhat in connection with the said will for decision. The said Sushila Bala Devi died on 25th November, 2005 but the relatives of said Sushila Bala Devi ignoring existence of Sushila’s will transferred the property involved in the aforesaid probate suit to the plaintiff. The will being executed in connection with the self-same property and is a former transaction and the transfer made by her legal heirs in respect of self-same property is a subsequent transaction. He further submits when probate proceedings became contentious, it gets the character of a suit. Accordingly, the petitioner contended that the probate proceeding should be disposed of before the disposal of the partition suit, otherwise there might be multiplicity of judicial proceedings.
