IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(T. I.J.)
D.R. Dhanuka, J.
Mrs. Jerbanoo Khurshed Cursetji and others..... Petitioners.
Versus
Adi Khurshedji Cursetji ..... Respondent.
Suit No. 28 of 1985, decided on 11-11-1992.
Advocates appeared :
U.J. Makhija with Jimmy Avasia i/b Mulla Mulla, for plaintiffs.
D.V. Merchant with A.S. Vakil i/b Manilal Hiralal Co., for defendants.
Held, such non-provision in favour of his one child will not cast any doubt about genuineness" of will and is valid.
2. On or about 20th October 1983, Mrs. Jerbanoo Khurshed Cursetji alias Jer of Bombay, Mrs. Meher Rusi Dalal, Mr. Hormuzdiar Dinshawji Choksi and Mrs. Dinaz Hormuzdiar Choksi, filed Petition No. 770 of 1983, seeking probate of the last Will and Testament and three Codicils of Dr. Khurshed, J. Cursetji, referred to in the petition. Dr. Khurshed, J. Cursetji alias Dr. Khurshed Jehangirji C. alias Dr. Khurshed Jehangir Jameshedji Cursetji alias Dr. K.J.J. Cursetji alias Dr. Cursetji Khurshed J.J. alias Dr. Khurshed J.J. Cursetji is hereinafter referred to as "the Testator". The Testator died at Bombay on or about the 1st day of May 1983. The Testator left him surviving as his only heir and next-of-Kin according to Indian Succession Act applicable to Parsees, the following persons i.e. (1) Mrs. Jerbanoo Khurshed Cursetji, widow (2) Mrs. Meher Rusi Dalal, daughter (3) Mr. Adi Khurshed Cursetji, the son. The petitioners averred in the petition that the petitioners were executors of the said Will and codicils. Mr. Johanbux, J. Gandevia, one of the remaining executors has issued a letter (duly marked as an exhibit in this suit) supporting this petitioners. The Testator was a medical practitioner. The petitioners have averred in the petition that on 22nd January 1968, the Testator had executed a Will duly attested by Mr. Rusi N. Sethna well-known Advocate and Solicitor of this Court. The testator was client of M/s. Romer Dadachanji Sethna, a firm of Advocates Solicitors. By Clause 1 of the said Will, the Testator appointed the petitioner No. 1 his wife, petitioner No. 2, his daughter and petitioner No. 3 his friend as executrices and the Executor of the said Will. By Clause 3 of the said Will the Testator bequeathed all his estate and effects whatsoever and wheresoever situate subject to and after payment of funeral and testamentary expenses and debts, rates, taxes and duties and any legacies which he may bequeath by any codicil to the Will, to his wife, the petitioner No. 1 absolutely. By Clause 4 of the said Will, it was provided that in the event of petitioner No. 4 predeceasing the Testator or dying under circumstances in which it was impossible to ascertain who died first, the following provisions shall take effect :
"(a) I BEQUEATH to my son Adi absolutely :
(i) My dispensary at Kanahya Bhuvan, 554, Girgaum Road, Bombay 2, together with all furniture fixtures, fittings, drugs, implements, instruments, containers and all other effects and things therein and the tenancy rights of the premises wherein my said dispensary is situated :
and
(ii) all amounts from time to time lent and advanced by me to my son Adi either personally or in connection with his business of Mic Products Co."
By the said Will the Testator made bequests of residue of his estate subject to and after payment of funeral and other testamentary expenses, debts and liabilities and legacies bequeathed by the said Will or any codicil thereto in favour of his daughter petitioner No. 2, her heirs and administrators absolutely. No bequest was made by the said Will in favour of Mr. Rusi Dalal. On 3rd November 1970, the Testator executed a codicil to the said Will dated 22nd day of January 1968. The said codicil is brief and simple. By Clause 1 of the sadi codicil, the Testator appointed his brother Jamshed J. Cursetji as an additional Executor of the said Will. Clause 2 of the said codicils reads as under :
"2. I REVOKE the bequest made to my son Adi under Clause 4(a)(i) of my Will."
By Clause 3 of the said codicil the Testator confirmed the Will dated 22nd day of January 1968, in all other respects. As a result of the said codicil, bequest made in favour of his son Adi i.e. in respect of Dispensary premises together with furniture fixtures, fittings etc., was revoked by the testator. By the said codicil the testator did not revoke the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.