1. Heard the learned counsel, Mr. R. K. Srivastava for the caveators, one filed by Shishir Kumar Choudhary, second filed by Vijayawant Kumar Choudhary and the third filed by Balwant Kumar Choudhary and Samant Kumar Choudhary jointly.

2. The testamentary case has been filed under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by the petitioner, Dharmesh Kumar for the grant of probate in respect of the properties mentioned in the schedule of the petition which are the estate of the deceased testator namely Shreemant Kumar Choudhary.

3. The caveators have filed the caveat opposing the grant of the probate with respect to the Will. The caveators case is that in fact, subsequent to the alleged Will sought to be probated by petitioner, another Will has been executed by the deceased testator, Shreemant Kumar Choudhary superseding his earlier Will in favour of four caveators and two others and on the basis of the subsequent Will executed by the testator, the caveators have already filed probate case being Probate Case No.14 of 2012 which is pending before the District Judge, Samastipur. Therefore, they have got caveatable interest in this probate case.

4. At the time of hearing of this caveat applications, the learned counsel, Mr. R.K.P.Singh for the applicant relying on various decisions of this Court, Hon’ble Supreme Court and other High Courts such as, 1978 BBCJ 265 (Darogi Singh Vs. Smt. Girja Devi), AIR 1983 Patna 149(Kalika Singh and another Vs. Awadhesh Narain Singh and others), AIR 1978 Patna 220 (Narayan Sah Vs. Sm. Devaki), AIR 1995 Patna 122 (In Re : Late Rajo Singh Ramautar Singh alias Ganesh Shankar), AIR 1964 Calcutta 34 (In the Goods of Mahammad Bashir (deceased)), AIR 1941 Patna 475(Kashi Nath Singh Vs. Dulhin Gulzari Kuer) and (2008) 4 Supreme Court Cases 300 (Krishna Kumar Birla Vs. Rajendra Singh Lodha and others) submitted that the persons who have got no interest in the estate of the deceased in presenti have got no caveatable interest and they cannot be allowed to contest the probate application. According to the learned counsel, Ram Ashray Choudhary has four sons namely, Shreemant Kumar Choudhary(testator), Hemant Kumar Choudhary, Silwant Kumar Choudhary and Yashwant Kumar Choudhary. On the death of Shreemant Kumar Choudhary, the property will devolve on Yashwant Kumar Choudhary in view of the Hindu Succession Act because his two other brothers, Hemant Kumar Choudhary and Silwant Kumar Choudhary predeceased the testator, Shreemant Kumar Choudhary. Therefore, the sons of Hemant Kumar Choudhary being nephew of the testator will have no interest in the property of Shreemant Kumar Choudhary and likewise, three other caveators who are the sons of Yashwant Kumar Choudhary have also got no caveatable interest because the property of Shreemant Kumar Choudhary devolved on their father, Yashwant Kumar Choudhary who is still alive. In such circumstances, in view of the aforesaid decisions, the caveators have got no caveatable interest as such, the caveats filed by them be discharged.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel, Mr. Srivastava appearing on behalf of the caveators submitted that all the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable in the present case because in none of those cases, the caveators were claiming special interest in the estate of the testator and in the present case, the caveators are claiming special interest in the testator’s estate because subsequent to the alleged Will which is said to be forged by the caveators, the testator has already executed another Will in favour of the caveators along with two others on 30.11.2011 and for obtaining probate of the said Will, they have already filed probate case being Probate Case No.14 of 2012 which is pending still for decision. Now, therefore, the petitioner is claiming for the grant of probate for estate of the deceased and the caveators are also claiming probate for the estate of the deceased and each of them a