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
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:
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
Pankaj P. Doshi vs. Jyotsanaben Doshi reported in 2013 5 MhLJ 432
Executrix must provide accurate inventory and accounts of the estate, failing which may lead to removal and appointment of a Special Officer for investigation.
Revenue authorities cannot adjudicate on ownership rights; long-standing jamabandi entries must be respected and made visible online for administrative purposes.
Court affirms the necessity for joint management of trust properties reflecting the settlor's intentions, granting trusteeship to legal heirs and appointing a Special Officer for oversight.
The court clarified that revisions against orders of the Assistant Record Officer must be filed before the Record Officer, not the Commissioner, as per the U.P. Land Revenue Act.
A tenant cannot dispute the title of the landlord, and genuine need for premises must be established without alternative accommodation for eviction to be warranted. Adverse possession claims require ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.