The main legal point established is the limited jurisdiction of the Probate Court, the applicability of procedural laws in granting relief, and the use of inherent power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

1. Heard.

2. Admit.

3. Record and proceedings are dispensed with by consent at the admission stage.

4. The challenge is to the order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Yavatmal (trial Court) granting interim injunction dt.16.8.2014 below Exh.5 in M.J.C. No. 40 of 2014. The interim order restrained creation of third party rights in disputed property mentioned in para 5 of the application and also restrained withdrawal of amount from the Savings Bank Account No. 01190005930 in the State Bank of India at Main branch, Yavatmal.

5. The facts in the background are stated thus :M. J.C No. 62 of 2008 was filed for grant of Probate/ Letter of Administration allowed on 2.4.2012. Pursuant to the order of issuance of the Letter of Administration allegedly obtained by fraud, name of Bharat Bajoria was deleted from the proceedings and allottees (wife and son of said Bharat Bajoria) of the L/A were likely to sell the disputed properties and withdraw the sums deposited in the Savings Bank account (supra).

4. Objections of the appellant herein is that :

i) The proceeding under Section 383 of the Indian Succession Act is not tenable.

ii) The Court had no jurisdiction to grant interim injunction in view of Section 41 (b) of the Specific Relief Act. The provision of section 41 (b) of the Specific Relief Act lays down the circumstances under which the injunction order cannot be made.

iii) Relief of temporary injunction cannot be granted by the Testamentary Court.

5. The trial Court came to prima facie finding that though applicant no.3 in M.J.C. No.62 of 2008 was living, applicant nos. 1 and 2, fraudulently claiming that they are legal heirs of applicant no.3, have moved the Court for deleting the name of applicant no. 3 Bharat Bajoria. Applicants nos. 1 and 2 thereafter got their names mutated and were in the process to sell the disputed property (allegedly sold one property).

6. The question raised in this appeal is as to whether the trial Court was correct to grant interim injunction order impugned herein. The allottees of L/A were expected to administer the property left by the deceased. Letter of Administration did not vest any absolute legal title in applicant nos. 1 and 2 to sell the disputed property. Hence, it was considered as a fit case to use inherent power of the Court under Section 151 of the Code of Civil procedure and to inject applicants no. 1 and 2 from creating third party rights in respect of the disputed property and to restrain from withdrawing the money from the Savings Bank account (supra) till disposal of the main application. The object of the impugned order was to preserve the status quo as it is till the disposal of the M.J.C. 40 of 2014.

7. According to learned Advocate Mr. Mirza, in the ruling in Ramchandra Ganpatrao Hande vs. Vithalrao Hande reported in 2011 (4 ) Mh. L. J. 50, it is argued that the Indian Succession Act is a self-contained code insofar as the question of making an application for probate, grant or refusal of probate or an appeal carried against the decision of the probate Court. This is clearly manifested in the fascicule of the provisions of the Act. The probate proceedings shall be conducted by the probate Court in the manner prescribed in the Act and in no other ways. The grant of probate with a copy of the will annexed establishes conclusively as to appointment of the executor and valid execution of the will. Thus, it does no more than establish the factum of the will and the legal character of the executor. Probate Court does not decide any question of title or of existence of the property itself. A Testamentary Court is only concerned with finding out whether or not the testator executed the testamentary instrument of his free will. It is settled law that grant of a Probate or Letters of Administration does not confer title to property. They merely enable administration of the estate of the deceased. The jurisdiction of the Probate Court is limited being confined only to consider genuineness o