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

2025 Supreme(Cal) 84

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
KRISHNA RAO, J.
IN THE GOODS OF:
Dipty Maity (Deceased)
GA No. 2 of 2021 In PLA No. 104 of 2016
Decided on : 15-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Debajyoti Basu, Adv., Mr. Jayed Hossain, Adv., Mr. K.M. Hossain, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anirban Bose, Adv., Mr. Jit Ray, Adv., Mr. Satyajit Senapati, Adv.

Executrix must provide accurate inventory and accounts of the estate, failing which may lead to removal and appointment of a Special Officer for investigation.

Headnote:(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 301 - Probate proceedings - Application for removal of executrix due to failure to provide proper inventory and accounts of estate - The applicant alleged that the executrix collected rents and appropriated surplus without proper disclosure, failing to adhere to the deceased's will. The court found discrepancies in the inventory and accounts filed by the executrix, indicating mismanagement. (Paras 1-40)

(B) Executors and Administrators - Duties - An executrix must administer the estate according to the will and provide accurate accounts to beneficiaries. The court emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in estate management. (Paras 1, 17, 35)

(C) Special Officer Appointment - The court appointed a Special Officer to verify property details and investigate allegations of mismanagement, highlighting the court's role in ensuring proper administration of estates. (Paras 24-44)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, a daughter of the deceased, alleged that the executrix failed to provide a true inventory and account of the estate, mismanaged the property, and collected rents without proper disclosure. The deceased's will appointed the executrix to manage the estate and distribute assets equally among the daughters.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the executrix did not provide a complete inventory or accurate accounts, leading to concerns about the management of the estate.

Issues: The main issues included whether the executrix should be removed for failing to provide proper inventory and accounts and the legitimacy of the accounts filed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the executrix's failure to provide accurate accounts and inventory warranted scrutiny and potential removal, emphasizing the need for proper estate management.

Result: The court directed the executrix to furnish detailed accounts and appointed a Special Officer to investigate the estate's management.

ORDER :

1. The applicant Smt. Sangita Das @ Sangita Maity Das has filed the present application being G.A. No. 2 of 2021 in PLA No. 104 of 2016 praying for the following reliefs:

    “a) Refuse to accept Inventory as being filed by the respondent No.1 and further direct the respondent No.1 to submit a revised full and true inventory and to exhibit those same before this Hon’ble Court, in the manner as may be directed;

    b) Refuse to accept Account as being filed by the respondent No.1 and further direct the respondent No.1 to submit a revised true and correct account of the properties and credit and to exhibit the same before this Hon’ble Court, in the manner as may be directed;

    c) Direct the respondent No.1 to administer the property and assets of the said deceased properly and in any concerning to her said last will and to distribute shares to the legatees in manner as directed by the said deceased in her said will;

    d) In default thereof, remove the respondent No.1 immediately from administering of the property and credits of the deceased and in any concerning to her said las will;

    e) If and when do necessary, appoint a Special Officer in place and stead of the respondent No.1, to administer the properties and credits of the deceased and in any way concerning to her said last will and to distribute shares to the legatees in the manner as directed by the deceased in her said will;

    f) Allow the applicant with the respondent No.1 to administer the property and credit of the deceased and in any way concerning to her said last will, in pendency of the instant application;

    g) Allow the applicant with the respondent No.1 to collect the rent from the occupiers of the said Sushila Sadan, in pendency of the instant application;

    h) Pass ad-interim order(s);

    i) Order costs and incidental;

    j) Pass such other and further order(s) and/or direction(s) as to this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

2. One Dipti Maity during her life time published her last Will and Testament dated 19 Bhadra, 1420 B.S. corresponding to 5th September, 2013 of the English calendar. She died on 4th November, 2013 leaving behind her three daughters, namely, Smt. Sangita Das @ Sangita Maity Das, Sudipta Maity and Susmita Kar. The husband of the deceased had predeceased her.

3. As per the last Will and Testament of the deceased, her three daughters will be beneficiaries and legatees in equal shares and rates to each other to the estates, property and assets and the deceased’s eldest daughter namely, Sudipta Maity, the respondent no.1 herein was appointed as the sole executrix of her last Will and Testament.

4. In the year 2016, the respondent no.1, being the sole executrix, applied for grant of probate of last Will and Testament, which was registered as P.L.A. No. 104 of 2016.

5. On 9th July, 2018, this Court respondent no.1 of the last Will Maity. was pleased to grant probate to the and Testament of the deceased, Dipti

6. In the Probate dated 9th July, 2016, it is categorically mentioned that the executrix in the said Will and Testament named within the State of West Bengal and she having undertaken the administration of the said property, estate and credits and to make full and true inventory thereof and to exhibit the same before this Court within six months from the date of issue of the said grant and also to render to this Court, a true account of the said properties, estates and credits within One Year from the issue of the order dated 9th July, 2016.

7. The schedule of the said last Will and Testament of the deceased describes two immovable properties and both are stated to be a bastu land and furthermore in the said Will and Testament, it has been stated that one of the schedule land amongst them comprises with the structure and constructions as a four storied building and named as “Sushila Sadan” which is being fully occupied by bank and other offices like post offices, telephone office, women welfare office, government offices etc. on rental basis.

8. It was further stated

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