The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and the City Civil Court Act, 1953, regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court and the City Civil Court in probate matters.

JUDGMENT :

Arindam Mukherjee, J.

1. Amal Kumar Mitra a hindu governed by the Dayabhaga school of hindu law during his life time died on 21st March, 2006 at Suraksha Hospital, Salt Lake, Kolkata leaving behind his window, two sons and one married daughter as his legal heirs and heiresses. Amal Kumar Mitra is said to have left behind a Will dated 9th February, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the said Will) as his last Will and testament. Under the Will he has appointed his younger son Santanu Kumar Mitra as the sole executor.

2. The sole executor has filed an application for grant of probate of the said Will being PLA No.249 of 2011. The said application for grant has been contested by Anuradha, the married daughter of the testator. The application for grant having been set down as contentious cause by an order dated 27th January, 2015 is numbered as testamentary suit No.7 of 2015 being the instant suit. The executor Santanu Mitra is the plaintiff while Anuradha Das, the caveatrix is the defendant in the instant suit. The suit has reached the stage of trial.

3. The instant application is by the defendant for “rejection of the admission of the plaint” on the ground that this Court lacks the jurisdiction in receiving, entertaining, trying and adjudicating the suit in as much as the testator had all his immovable and movable assets outside the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of this Court, had his permanent abode at AE 296, Sector-I Bidhannagar (Salt Lake City) Kolkata-700064 also outside the jurisdiction and died also outside the jurisdiction of this Court.

4. The prayer made by the applicant/defendant, however, appears to be not in proper form. The applicant/defendant as appears from the application and the submissions made at the hearing of the application is seeking return of the plaint on the ground of lack of competence of this Court. It cannot be said at this stage that the executor does not have the right to file an application for grant of probate unless it is held at the trial that the executor is not entitled to a grant. There is no question of admission of the plaint on the application for grant having been set down as contentions cause and numbered as a testamentary suit, particularly when the applicant has contested the grant by filing a caveat and an affidavit in support thereof. The prayer of the applicant is, therefore, for return of the plaint and not for “rejection of the admission of the plaint”. Considering the prayer to be for the return of the plaint, I now proceed to deal with the instant application.

5. The authority of this Court being a Chartered High Court constituted under the Royal Charter is derived from Clause 34 of the Letters Patent, 1865 and section 300(1) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the 1925 Act). Clause 34 confers original jurisdiction while section 300(1) of the 1925 Act gives concurrent jurisdiction to this Court along with the District Judge.

6. In the instant case the deceased had his permanent abode at Bidhannagar (Salt Lake City). He died at a Hospital also in Salt Lake. The place of abode, the place of death, the immovable property and one bank account are at Bidhannagar within the territorial jurisdiction of North 24 Parganas. The bank account at Kakurgachhi is within the territorial jurisdiction of South 24 Parganas.

7. Going by the place of abode, place of death, location of the immovable property and one bank account, the application for grant of probate could have been filed in the Court of the District Judge, North 24 Parganas at Barasat under the provision of section 264 of the 1925 Act. Similarly, under the same provision, in view of the fact that one bank account is at Kakurgachhi, the probate application could have also been filed at the Court of District Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas. On the other hand in view of the provisions of se