SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Cal) 168

High Court Of Calcutta
KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA
PRIYAMVADA DEVI BIRLA - Appellant
Versus
MADHAV PRASAD BIRLA - Respondent
G. A. 3878 Of 2004
Decided On : 03/11/2005

Headnote:

Caveators lodged caveats against grant of probate to the Will of the Testatrix on the ground that they have caveatable interest in the estate of the Testatrix. The Court examined the interest of each caveator in the estate of the Testatrix and held that none of the caveators have any caveatable interest in the estate of the Testatrix and accordingly discharged the caveats.

Fact of the Case:

The Testatrix died on 3rd July 2004 and she was pre-deceased by her husband on 30th July 1990. The couple left no issue. As such under Section 15 (l) (b) and (2) of the hindu Succession Act, 1956 her deceased husband's sisters namely Laxmi Devi Newar and Radha Devi Mohota would have inherited the estated had she died intestate. This rule of succession as provided in the schedule of this Act is applicable in the case of hindu female estate both self-acquired and inherited from her husband side after commencement of the said Act.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that none of the caveators have any caveatable interest in the estate of the Testatrix and accordingly discharged the caveats.

Issues: Whether the caveators have any caveatable interest in the estate of the Testatrix.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that in order to maintain caveat a person has to establish his real interest or possibility of real interest on the existing fact. This interest may be claimed either on the basis of succession of both intestacy and testamentary or as a creditor or otherwise. The Court further held that the existence of mutual Will (assuming the said two Wills dated 13th July, 1982 are mutual Wills) and bequest thereunder are not by themselves caveatable interest meaning thereby this right of enforcement of agreement of mutuality is not an interest at all to receive citation of the probate proceedings in deciding the last Will of the same testator.

Final Decision: The Court discharged the caveats lodged by the caveators.

KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA

( 1 ) THE above application being g. A. No. 2721 of 2004 has been taken out by the propounder/executor of a testamentary document dated 18th April, 1999 of the above testatrix Priyamvada for discharge of caveats lodged by one Krishna Kumar Birla, basanta Kumar Birla, one Ganga Prosad birla and one Yasha Bardhan Birla. Sri R. S. Lodha, applicant herein says that the aforesaid four persons have no caveatable interest in the estate of the Priyamvada Devi birla since deceased (hereinafter referred to as the Lady)) as they do not have any slightest interest in the estate left by the Lady. Only Laxmi Devi Newar and Radha Devi mohta the sisters of her late husband madhab Prasad Birla, since deceased (hereinafter in short M. P.) are the heiresses and legal representatives to succeed the estate left by Lady in case of death intestacy. Obviously, it is the caveators at this stage who are to establish their right to maintain the caveats. In their affidavits in opposition in answer to the aforesaid charge four persons have separately stated as follows : g. P. Birla stated in his affidavit that in 1981 both the deceased lady and her husband namely M. P. Birla pursuant to agreement had executed mutual Wills, both dated 10th May, 1981. On 13th July, 1982 by consent they revoked the said mutual Wills but agreed once again, each other, as to disposition of their respective estates on their death in favour of the public charities as ultimate beneficiary and those Wills made pursuant to such agreement would be irrevocable and would remain unaltered. He says he is one of the surviving co-executors of the Will of the Lady. By this Will the Lady directed the executors to take possession of her entire estate and make over, donate or settle the same for the purpose of charity at their absolute discretion. That apart he has claimed that he is the paternal first cousin of late M. P. and if the genealogical table is looked into then it will appear that this deponent has possible chance of succeeding to the estate of the Lady in case of death intestacy. He is also co-owner of the disposed of property namely orchards at Kumaun. The deceased was the member of a larger Birla family so also this deponent. The Birla family at all material times carried on and still carries on several businesses through different companies. In some of these companies there is an interweaving shareholding in such a manner that they are part of complex pattern and thus evidence of involvement of the members of the Birla family is apparent in such companies in management thereof the different members of the Birla family. The deceased testatrix and the deponent are in reality co-trustees and/or in fiduciary capacity to all the shareholders of such companies and different members of the Birla family including those who are shareholders of such companies whether directly or indirectly, where both of them were in management. The deceased was a trustee and/or in a fiduciary relationship to the deponent and other members of the Birla family including himself who has shares directly and/or indirectly where the deceased was in management.

( 2 ) BASANT Kumar Birla being one of the caveators in his affidavit while explaining his caveatable interest has stated among others that he is the paternal first cousin of late M. P, Birla, the husband of the testatrix. He was one of the co-owners of the orchard along with said testatrix. The deceased and this caveator till the time of her death were directors of Century Textiles Industries ltd. of which he is the Chairman and Pilani investors and Investment Corporation Ltd. He is the member of the Birla Family along with the said testatrix. There is an interweaving of shareholdings in such a manner that they are part of well thought out pattern, and evidence of the involvement of members of the Birla Family in such companies and co-management thereof by different members of the Birla Family though a particular branch may be loo





























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top