JUDGMENT :

Krishna Rao, J.

1. The present application has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia that he may be exempted from furnishing an administration bond with two sureties in terms of the order dated 9th January, 2023, where under Letters of Administration have been granted in favour of the petitioner in respect of the estate of the deceased Kalpana Shukla.

2. The petitioner Upendra Kumar Shukla, who is a Class II heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 of the deceased Kalpana Shukla had filed an application under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, praying for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the estate of the deceased Kalpana Shukla. The said petition was uncontested and by an order dated 9th January, 2023, this Court has granted Letters of Administration in respect of the estate of the deceased in favour of the petitioner subject to furnishing personal bond of Rs. 16 lakh with two sureties within eight (8) weeks from date.

3. By an order dated 13th February, 2013, on the prayer made by the Counsel for the petitioner, time to furnish the personal bond in terms of order dated 9th January, 2023 was extended for a further period of six (6) weeks.

4. Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner is settled at United States of America and as such it is not possible for the petitioner to arrange for two sureties as per the order passed by this Court dated 9th January, 2023. He submits that as the petitioner is a resident of United States of America, any surety would have to make an application to the Reserve Bank of India and obtain approvals under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 as a surety to the administration bond.

5. Mr. Chowdhury further submits that it is almost impossible for administrative reasons for the petitioner to obtain permission from the Reserve Bank of India expeditiously or within the time granted by this Court.

6. The present application has been filed by the petitioner praying that the petitioner may be exempted from furnishing sureties for the estate of deceased on the plea that surety is required to be furnished to safeguard the ultimate interest of the heirs and in the instant case, there is no legal heirs and the beneficiaries of the estate of the deceased except the petitioner in respect thereof, Letters of Administration have been granted and nobody has came forward to raise any objection for grant of Letters of Administration to the estate of the deceased to the petitioner who has been authorised to administer the estate of the deceased. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the following decisions:

i. Sanjay Suri -vs-State and Others reported in 2003 (71) DRJ 446.

ii. Richa Pardeshi -vs-State reported in 2012 SCC OnLine Del 2978.

iii. Unreported judgement passed by Hon’ble High Court at Delhi in TEST. CAS.13/2013, I.A. 723/2018, I.A. 8060/2020 Ishan Kapur -vs-State and Others dated 22nd February, 2021.

iv. (2023) 10 SCC 83 General Manager -vs-Ikbal and Others.

7. The Indian Succession Act, 1925 is a self-contained Code insofar as the question of making an application for grant or refusal of probate, and for grant or refusal to grant letters of administration or an appeal against the decision of the probate court. The grant of probate by a court of competent jurisdiction is in the nature of proceedings in rem as long as the order of probate remains in force. It is conclusive as to the proper execution and validity of the will, unless it is duly revoked as per law. A probate order not only binds all the parties impleaded in the proceedings, it also binds other persons in all proceedings arising out of the will or connected therewith. Similarly, in the case of intestate succession, the letters of administration granted in favour of the administrator is the court's imprimatur to him to administer the estate of the deceased by paying full expenses, duties, legacy, recover the dues to the