T. CHATTERJEE, J.

( 1 ) WHEN some argument was advanced by the learned counsel for the parties on the question of grant of interim relief, it was suggested by the learned counsel for the parties that the appeal itself could be treated as on day's list and disposed of. Such being the stand taken by the parties we had taken up the hearing of the appeal itself and disposed of by this judgment.

( 2 ) THIS appeal is preferred against the judgment and or order passed by a learned Judge on 1st August, 2001 in C. A. N. No. 4747 of 2000 in connection with P. L. A. No. 94 of 2000 by which the application filed by the executor respondent for discharging the caveat filed on August 11, 2000 at the instance of the appellants was allowed.

( 3 ) SMT. Bakul Banerjee who was a spinster executed a Will in respect of her estate being premises No. AB-124, Salt Lake City, Sector-I, within Salt Lake Police Station (North) Calcutta-700 064 in favour of her sister Smt. Sujata Sengupta wife of one Shri Mukul Sengupta with absolute right to dispose of the property. This Will was alleged to have been executed by Smt. Bakul Banerjee on 26th July, 1994 in which Mr. Sadhan Banerjee was made an executor of the same. Shri Sadhan Banerjee has made an application for grant of probate of the Will alleged to have been executed by Smt. Bakul Banerjee in this Court. In the said probate proceeding the appellants who are the brothers of the deceased Smt. Bakul Banerjee filed a caveat which was allowed. However an application was made by the alleged executor Sri Sadhan Banerjee for discharging the caveat. This application for not permitting the appellants to contest the probate proceeding was allowed by the learned Judge by the impugned order only on the ground that the appellants could not be said to have any locus standi to contest the probate proceeding in view of section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which says that on the death of a Hindu female who had acquired property by herself, the estate of such a Hindu female dying intestate shall devolve upon :- (A)firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband; (b)secondly, upon the heirs of the husband; (c)thirdly, upon the mother and father; (d)fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and (e)lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

( 4 ) ADMITTEDLY the appellants are the brothers of the deceased. It is true that their mother is still alive. It is also true that on the death of Smt. Bakul Banerjee who was a spinster, the property in usual succession shall devolve upon the mother in view of section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act when the father is not alive. It is equally true that sub-section (d) of section 15 of Hindu Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as "the H. S. Act") comes after the devolution of the property of the deceased Smt. Bakul Banerjee on her mother in view of sub-section (c) of section 15 of the Act. Therefore, it is true that on the death of Smt. Bakul Banerjee the estate of the deceased would devolve upon her mother by usual succession. The appellants would come to inherit the estate of the deceased only on the death of their mother as heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Smt. Bakul Banerjee along with the beneficiary of the Will who was the sister of the deceased. As noted hereinearlier, the learned trial Judge held that since the mother is very much alive, the brothers who are the appellants before us had no locus standi to contest the probate proceeding as, even if the Will is not found to be genuine by the Court, in that case also the brothers cannot get the property of the deceased as the mother is very much alive. Feeling aggrieved by this order this appeal has been preferred by the brother before us.

( 5 ) MR. Ghosh appearing on behalf of the brother/appellants contended that any interest, however silight, is sufficient to entitle a party to oppose a testamentary paper or instrument. In this connection Mr.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document