Back
KRISHNA RAO
Ava Saha (Deceased) – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Krishna Rao, J.
1. This is an application filed by the petitioner namely, Shaibal Saha for revocation of probate granted by this Court dated 22nd June, 2023 of the last Will and Testament dated 14th January, 2020 in an application filed by the executor namely, Surajit Kumar Saha being PLA No. 164 of 2022.
2. The petitioner is claiming that the petitioner is the son of the deceased brother of the late husband of the testatrix. The testatrix inherited the property left behind by her husband who died intestate on 4th September, 1990. The son of the testatrix, namely, Bitansa Saha also died on 2nd July, 1997. The testatrix died on 13th May, 2021 leaving behind the legal heirs of her husband side.
3. Mr. Soumyen Dutta, Learned Advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner being the son of the deceased brother of the late husband of the testatrix has got caveatable interest over the property but no notice of the probate proceeding is served upon the petitioner. He submits that the executor had the knowledge about the address of the legal heirs of the husband of the testatrix but the petitioner knowingly has pleaded that he could not trace out the address of the
The court ruled that failure to notify all legal heirs and concealment of material facts during probate proceedings constitutes just cause for revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Indian Su....
The applicant must demonstrate a 'just cause' for revocation of Probate and establish a caveatable interest as per Section 263 of the Succession Act, 1925.
The court ruled that failure to disclose necessary parties with caveatable interest justifies revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act.
A testamentary court cannot adjudicate on the status of a party without a declaratory decree, and non-citation does not automatically warrant revocation of probate.
Fraudulent obtaining of probate by making false statements in the Testamentary Petition is a gross abuse of the process of law and amounts to a nullity.
Fraudulent conduct in obtaining probate warrants revocation, as it sullies the course of justice.
A probate granted without citing parties who ought to have been cited is liable to be revoked.
Revocation of probate not maintainable if challenging testator's title to properties, as such claimant lacks caveatable interest and is stranger to probate proceedings limited to will's genuineness.
The court held that a grant of probate can be revoked if the procedure was defective, especially if necessary parties were not cited, emphasizing the jurisdictional limitations of testamentary procee....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
