Allowed¶51

Smt.Manjula H L v. Mr. Pramod H.L

Karnataka HC17 Oct 2025MFA/8442/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Probate; letters of administration; beneficiary versus executor; Hindu Law; Indian Succession Act 1925 Sections 276, 278, 299 and 63; proof of will by sons of attesting witnesses; Ex.P.1 original will; will dated 18.03.1991; self-acquired properties item Nos.1 to 7; respondents no objection; remained absent; Karnataka High Court Bengaluru; MFA No. 8442 of 2024 (ISA); Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar; appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; order dated 26.11.2024 in P & SC.No.23/2024 set aside; probate and letters of administration issued to the appellant in respect of the Will dated 18.03.1991 executed by late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy in respect of item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties; no costs. ¶51

Smt.Manjula H L Vs Mr. Pramod H.L — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶51

Issue for consideration

Whether probate and letters of administration can be granted to a beneficiary under a Will who is not the executor appointed under it. +1 more

¶32

Court's answer

Under the Hindu Law, probate and letters of administration can be granted even to a beneficiary of the Will and not only to the executor; the Probate Court's approach in refusing probate on the ground that the appellant was a beneficiary and not the executor is not correct.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

The legal requirements for proving execution of the Will stand complied with and there is no contra evidence disproving the execution of the Will.

¶42

Key takeaways

The appellant proved that late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy was the owner of item Nos.1 to 7 of the schedule properties (acquired as self-acquired properties) and had accordingly executed the Will dated 18.03.1991.ratio¶42
Since the appellant is the natural daughter of the deceased, there is no deviation in bequeathing the properties to her, and the reasoning assigned by the Probate Court is not correct.ratio¶47
The impugned order dismissing the probate petition is liable to be set aside.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Miscellaneous First Appeal under S.299 of the Indian Succession Act against dismissal of a probate petition (P & SC.No.23/2024, IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District) filed under Sections 276 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by the daughter-beneficiary under a Will dated 18.03.1991 executed by late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy in respect of item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties. Held: under the Hindu Law a beneficiary under a Will, and not merely the appointed executor, can also obtain probate and letters of administration; execution of the Will was duly proved — the original Will (Ex.P.1) was produced and P.W.2 and P.W.3, sons of the attesting witnesses, identified their fathers' signatures, satisfying Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, with no contra evidence; the schedule properties were the deceased's self-acquired properties; the appellant being the natural daughter, there was no deviation in the bequest. Respondents had no objection and remained absent. Appeal allowed; order dated 26.11.2024 set aside; probate and letters of administration issued in respect of the Will dated 18.03.1991; no costs.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.8442 OF 2024 (ISA)

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

SMT.MANJULA H L D/O LATE H L LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY, W/O MR K B PARASHURAM, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 203/4, THIRD MAIN,FOURTH CROSS, BALAJI LAYOUT, HONGASANDRA, M BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH - 560 068.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. RANGARAMU V.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND :

¶15

MR. PRAMOD H.L S/O LATE H L LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

¶16

SMT RATHNAMMA W/O LATE H L LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT * 80 YEARS,

¶17

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO. 3/1-1, 3^RD CROSS, 4^TH MAIN, BALAJI LAYOUT, HONGASANDRA, SLV PROVISION STORE,

¶18

*Corrected as per court order dated 18.11.2025.

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 068.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. ASHWIN KUMAR H.,ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS MFA FILED U/S 299 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2024 PASSED IN P AND SC.NO.23/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 276 AND 278 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT.

¶25

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

The appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner questioning the order dated 26.11.2024 passed in P & SC.No.23/2024 by IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, thereby, the petition filed under Sections 276 and 278 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, is dismissed.

¶29

It is the case of the appellant/petitioner that the appellant is the daughter of one late

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy and defendant No.1 is her brother. The said late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy died testament by executing the Will in favour of the appellant/petitioner dated 18.03.1991 with respect to item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties. It is stated that the appellant is in possession and enjoyment of the schedule properties by virtue of the said Will. Therefore, she has filed the petition for grant of probate and letters of administration. But the Probate Court has dismissed the petition on the reason that the appellant is the beneficiary of the Will, but not appointed the executor. Therefore, probate and letters of administration cannot be granted. Thus, dismissed the petition.

¶33

Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the petition, the petitioner has preferred the appeal by raising various grounds in the regular appeal and argued in consonance with the grounds raised that, though under the Hindu Law grant of probate is not mandatory, but when the appellant has filed the petition for grant of

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

probate and letters of administration and the appellant had examined the attesting witnesses by producing the original Will and execution of the Will is duly proved, therefore, the Probate Court ought to have granted probate and letters of administration even in favour of beneficiary of the Will as it is not only granted to the executors. Therefore, prays to allow the appeal.

¶37

Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that they have no objection to grant probate and letters of administration as prayed for as the appellant is the sister of defendant No.1 and daughter of defendant No.2.

¶38

Before the Probate Court the appellant has

¶39

examined two attesting witnesses as P.W.2 and P.W.3 who are sons of the attesting witnesses. Even P.W.2 and P.W.3 have deposed that their forefather have attested the Will and Ex.P.1 is the original Will. Therefore, as per Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act the legal requirement is

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

complied with in proving the execution of the Will and there is no contra evidence in disproving the execution of the Will. Further the other documentary evidence prove the fact that late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy had acquired item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties as they are self acquired properties of the deceased. Therefore, the appellant has proved that late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy was the owner of item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties and accordingly, had executed the Will dated 18.03.1991.

¶43

When the appellant has produced the

¶44

original Will and the said execution of the Will is proved by attesting witnesses and P.W.2 and P.W.3 had identified their father’s signature that they have put the signature on the Will when all the legal requirements are complied with and also there is no objection by the respondents to the petition as they have remained absent.

¶45

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Further the appellant is the natural

¶48

daughter of the deceased late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy. Hence, there is no deviation in bequeathing the properties. Therefore, the reasoning assigned by the Probate Court is not correct. The reasons assigned by the Probate court are that the appellant is not the executor, but the beneficiary. Hence, the Probate Court in not granting probate and letters of administration is not a correct approach under the Hindu Law and even the beneficiary can also obtain probate and letters of administration. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶49

Hence, I proceed to pass the following

¶50

ORDER

¶51

i. The appeal is allowed .

¶52

ii. The order dated 26.11.2024 passed in P & SC.No.23/2024 by IX Addl. District and

¶53

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside.

¶54

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:41620 MFA No. 8442 of 2024

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

iii. Issue probate and letters of administration to the appellant in respect of Will dated 18.03.1991 executed by late H.L.Lakshminarayana Reddy in respect of item Nos.1 to 7 of schedule properties.

¶58

iv. No costs.

¶59

SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE

¶60

PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38

Smt.Manjula H L v. Mr. Pramod H.L

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Manjula H L v. Mr. Pramod H.L

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Babu Reddy Vs Sri Lokesh Reddy

Sri S v Ganesh Vs Sri B Ramachandrappa

Poornaprajna Housing Building Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs Mr M Vara Prasad Reddy

Kum. Ayyagiri Prerana Vs Mr. Ravi Ayyagari

Sri. Ashwathanarayana Vs Sri. Nagaraju

Sri. Manjunatha Vs Sri. N. Sampath Kumar