Dismissed¶45

Mr. Kjetil Sandvik v. Nil

Karnataka HC23 Aug 2025PROB.CP/27/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Probate; Letters of Administration; Indian Succession Act 1925, Section 278 and Part IX; withdrawal of probate petition; dismissed as withdrawn; change of counsel; no objection certificate not necessary on retirement of earlier counsel; estate of Elizabeth Jacob Sandvik; petitioners Kjetil Sandvik, Yohann Jacob Sandvik, Yva Jacob Sandvik; counsel Smt. Lakshmi Menon; earlier counsel Sri.D Sa Ronald I; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Justice V Srishananda; decided 23 August 2025; NC: 2025:KHC:33114; PROB.CP No. 27 of 2023.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn pursuant to the petitioners' memo of withdrawal being placed on record; liberty to file a fresh petition and refund of court fees were sought in the memo but the order does not expressly state that they were granted. ¶45

Mr. Kjetil Sandvik Vs Nil — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:33114 PROB.CP No. 27 of 2023

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶8

PROBATE CIVIL PETITION NO. 27 OF 2023

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MR. KJETIL SANDVIK, SON OF MR. ROLF SANDVIK, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, PERMANENTLY OF KVERNBAKKEN 28, H0101, 1414 TROLLASEN, NORWAY, PRESENTLY AT B-1701/1801, NAGARJUNA ASTER PARK, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 065.

¶11

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

MR. YOHANN JACOB SANDVIK, SON OF THE KJETIL SANDVIK AFORESAID, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT LIAVEIEN 15H, H0104, 1435 AS, NORWAY.

¶13

MS. YVA JACOB SANDVIK, DAUGHTER OF THE KJETIL SANDVIK AFORESAID, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT C/O. ANNA ELLINGSEN, KARL STAAFFS VEI 67, H0302, 0665 OSLO, NORWAY.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. LAKSHMI MENON., ADVOCATE)

AND:

…RESPONDENT

NC: 2025:KHC:33114 PROB.CP No. 27 of 2023

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THIS PROBATE CIVIL PETITION HAS FILED UNDER SECTION 278 AND PART IX OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 PRAYING TO GRANT THEM, ON A JOINT AND SEVERAL BASIS, LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION WITH RESPECT TO THE ESTATE OF THE AFORMENTIONED DECEASESED MRS. ELIZABETH JACOB SANDVIK, TO HAVE EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE UNION OF INDIA, GRANTING THEM SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS MAY BE DEEMED FIT IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Sri.D Sa Ronald I, learned counsel is present.

¶27

Memo of retirement filed by learned counsel

¶28

Sri.D Sa Ronald I, is accepted, as the petitioner is represented by learned counsel Smt.Lakshmi Menon.

¶29

Even though the office has raised the objection

¶30

that no objection certificate was not obtained by counsel Smt.Lakshmi Menon from the earlier counsel Sri.D Sa Ronald I, since the earlier counsel has retired, no objection certificate is not necessary.

¶31

Further, memo of withdrawal is filed by the

¶32

present counsel, which reads as under:

¶33

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:33114 PROB.CP No. 27 of 2023

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

"The Petitioners respectfully submit as hereinunder:

¶36

1. The instant petition was filed seeking the grant of Letters of Administration to the Petitioners on a joint and several basis with respect to the estate of the aforementioned deceased Mrs. Elizabeth Jacob Sandvik. The Petitioners had approached this Hon'ble Court with the intention of administering and managing the estate in a lawful and orderly manner. However, subsequent to the filing of the petition, there have been significant changes to the facts and circumstances that necessitate the withdrawal of the present petition.

¶37

2. The Petitioners respectfully submits that the Petitioner No.1 who initially filed the petition is no longer available to actively pursue the matter. This unanticipated development has created practical and procedural challenges in the effective handling of the case. Given these circumstances, the continuation of the present proceedings would be both impractical and inefficient.

¶38

3. In light of the aforementioned changes and in the interest of justice, the Petitioners humbly request this Hon'ble Court to permit the withdrawal of the instant petition. The Petitioners further seeks liberty to institute a fresh petition in respect of the

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:33114 PROB.CP No. 27 of 2023

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

same subject matter, should the need arise in the future, particularly after due consideration of the updated factual landscape.

¶42

4. The Petitioners assure this Hon'ble Court that this request is made in good faith and with the utmost respect for the judicial process.

¶43

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take this memo on record, permit the Petitioners to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file a fresh petition in respect of the subject matter of this petition and to grant refund of the court fees paid in the interest of justice."

¶44

Placing the memo on record, petition is

¶45

dismissed as withdrawn .

¶46

Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶47

KVR

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Mr. Kjetil Sandvik v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Kjetil Sandvik v. Nil

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 Lakshmaiah Vs Sri Venkataronappa

Smt. Shrimathi Vs Sri. N S Rajeeva

Parama Naika Vs Susheelamma

Mrs Bernadette Vasnaik Vs Philip Francis Gerard Sequeira

Sri.Shridhar Bangera Vs Mr.S.Ganesh Nayak

Sri Shanmugam Vs Smt. M D Raju Sulochana