Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.Karnik, N.R.Borkar
Sarwan Kumar Jhabarmal Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Sachin Shyamsundar Begrajka – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M. S. KARNIK, J.
1. Learned Single Judge of this Court (Manish Pitale, J.) invoked Rule 28(C) of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980, to formulate following questions for decision by a larger bench.
“(I) Whether explanation (a) to (e) to Section 263 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT , 1925, are exhaustive or illustrative, in the context of “just cause” for revoking or annulling grant of Probate or Letters of Administration?
(II) Whether circumstances not covered under explanations (a) to (e) to Section 263 of the SUCCESSION ACT , 1925, can become the basis for “just cause” for the Court to revoke or annul grant of Probate or Letters of Administration?
(III) Whether the judgments of learned Single Judges of this Court in the cases of George Anthony Harris vs. Millicent Spencer [AIR 1933 Bom. 370] and Sharad Shankarrao Mane and etc. vs. Ashabai Shripati Mane [AIR 1997 Bom 275], lay down the correct position of law?”
2. The papers were accordingly placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for consideration. The Hon’ble the Chief Justice referred the questions formulated by learned Single Judge for consideration before this Division Bench.
3. The learned Single Judge was
Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 permits revocation of probate for just cause, with explanations provided being illustrative, allowing for broader judicial discretion.
(1) Revocation of Probate – Merely because aggrieved person has not appeared or defended his case in proceeding for grant of probate, it cannot be a reason for refusing to exercise jurisdiction under....
The explanations under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 are illustrative, allowing for revocation of probate based on just causes not explicitly listed.
The court ruled that failure to disclose necessary parties with caveatable interest justifies revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act.
The High Court's jurisdiction to grant probate is limited to cases where properties are outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the City Civil Court, and citation under Section 283(3) is unnecessary if....
(1) Revocation of Probate – Limitations starts from date of grant of probate and not from date of knowledge about probate proceedings.(2) Probate Court is a court of conscience – Approach of a probat....
The Testamentary Court's jurisdiction is limited to determining the validity of the Will, including its execution, attestation, and the testator's state of mind.
The court affirmed that revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act is tenable despite the existence of an appeal, and that Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC applies to such proce....
The main legal point established in this judgment is that proper service of notice and publication of citation in a newspaper with proper circulation are essential requirements for probate proceeding....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
