High Court Of Calcutta
SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE
RATNA CHAKRABORTY - Appellant
Versus
REKHA CHAKRABORTY - Respondent
Civil Order 269 Of 2003
Decided On : 04/09/2003
Fact of the Case:
The court analyzed an application for probate of a last will and testament and the grant of injunction in a non-contentious case.Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order granting probate was without jurisdiction as the proceeding became contentious when the wife of the testator expressed her intention to contest it.Issues:
The issues were whether the will was executed and attested in accordance with the law, and whether the District Delegate had the jurisdiction to grant probate in a contentious case.Ratio Decidendi:
The court held that the propounder must prove the execution and attestation of the will, and that the District Delegate does not have the power to grant probate in a contentious case.Final Decision:
The court set aside the order granting probate, directed the propounder to take steps in the Court of the District Judge, and ordered the wife to deposit the withdrawn service benefits in the Court of the District Judge. The court allowed the revisional application and made no order as to costs.( 1 ) THIS is an application under article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated October 5, 2002 passed by Shri Ratan Kumar Das, learned civil Judge (Junior Division) at Bongaon, district : North 24 Parganas, acting as the district Delegate, in Misc. Case No. 84 of 2002.
( 2 ) KIRAN Shankar Chakraborty executed a document stated to be his last will and testament on June 26, 2001 corresponding to Ashar 11, 1408 B. S. A photocopy of the said document is annexed as Annexure A to this application. It is stated in the said will that the testator married Shrimati rekha Chakraborty (see Choudhury) on august 12, 1998, but she all along inflicted mental and physical tortures on him; because of such behaviour of his wife, he started residing in a rented accommodation at Cossipur; the wife lodged complaint with the police against him and the police, at the instance of his wife, insulted him; the wife instituted a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against him and obtained an interim order from the learned Magistrate; he instituted a suit for divorce in the Court of the learned District judge, District : North 24 Parganas being matrimonial Suit No. 964 of 1999; that the wife of the testator was not looking after him, but his spinster sister was looking after him; he bequeathed all his movable and immovable properties, including his service benefits, in favour of his said sister and named and appointed her as the executor of the said Will.
( 3 ) THE testator, Kiran Shankar chakraborty, expired on October 27, 2001 and the said executor applied for grant of probate of the said Will on July 25, 2002 in the Court of the learned District Delegate at bongaon, District : North 24 Parganas, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 84 of 2002.
( 4 ) THE propounder moved an application for injunction in connection with the said proceeding seeking to restrain the wife of the testator either from withdrawing the service benefits of the testator from his employer or from alienating any immovable properties or the testator. The learned District Delegate initially passed an ad interim order of injunction in favour of the propounder.
( 5 ) THE wife of the testator, the opposite party in this revisional application, entered appearance in the said Misc. Case No. 84 of 2002 and expressed her desire to contest the claim. She, also, contested the prayer for temporary injunction.
( 6 ) THE learned District Delegate by his order dated October 5, 2002 rejected the said application for injunction on contest and the interim order of injunction, which was granted earlier, was vacated. The learned district Delegate in the order impugned held that the opposite party was the wife of the testator and the Will was an unprobated one. It was observed that it was very much unfortunate that the testator bequeathed all his assets in favour of her spinster sister, who has been a school teacher, although the testator had two unemployed brothers and his wife; therefore, such disposition has been very much unfortunate.
( 7 ) THE learned District Delegate, peculiarly enough, after rejecting the application for injunction, granted liberty to the wife of the testator to dispose of all the movable and immovable properties of her deceased-husband in respect of her appropriate share in accordance with law. The learned District delegate, therefore, fixed November 26, 2002 for further steps in the case.
( 8 ) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order,the propounder has come up with this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
( 9 ) IN my view the order impugned is wholly without jurisdiction and based on wrong application of the principles of law.
( 10 ) IT appears that the attention of the learned District Delegate has not been drawn about the mode of proof of the Will. The mode is like any other document. Nevertheless, the propounder of the Will has to remove completely
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.