Order :

Bivas Pattanayak, J. 

1. At the time of delivery of judgment, it is informed by learned advocates for both the sides that the petitioner, mother of the deceased, has already expired. Learned advocate, who represented the mother of the deceased, submitted that steps have already been taken in such regard. Accordingly, the judgment is delivered in open Court in presence of learned advocates for both the sides.

2. Both the applications have arisen in connection with a petition for grant of letters of administration and for issuance of special and general citation being PLA No. 8 of 2018 filed by the mother of the deceased Deepak Sen who passed away on 25th November, 2017 leaving behind the mother, widow and minor daughter as his legal heirs.

3. G.A. No. 5 of 2023 is filed by the widow of the deceased Deepak Sen. The applicant contends that in the second week of January 2018 she received a copy of application being GA 121 of 2018 filed by her mother-in- law Mrs. Rama Sen in connection with PLA 8 of 2018. However, no copy of PLA 8 of 2018 was served upon her. From the application being GA No. 121 of 2018 she came to learn that Mrs. Rama Sen had filed an application for obtaining letters of administration in respect of the estate of her deceased husband without any Will annexed. Fact remains that no citation was ever served upon the applicant or her daughter namely Dishari Sen. It is after receipt of copy of application being G.A. No.121 of 2018, the applicant lodged the caveat. The advocates of the applicant advised the applicant that unless the citation is received, there is no question of filing any caveat or any affidavit in support of caveat. The caveat lodged by the applicant sometime in January 2018 by the erstwhile learned advocate slipped out of her mind and she forgot to intimate the present advocate. Be that as it may, the citation was not issued either to the applicant or to her daughter and none of them had received copy of the petition being PLA No. 8 of 2018.

4. In the aforesaid facts, the applicant in G.A. 5 of 2023 being the widow of the deceased made following prayers:

“a) An order be passed directing Mrs. Roma Sen to serve a copy of P.L.A. No. 8 of 2018 on the applicants;

b) Leave be granted to the applicants to file caveats within a week from receipt of P.L.A. No. 8 of 2018;

c) Leave be granted to the applicants to file affidavit in support of caveat in P.L.A. No. 8 of 2018 within a period of two weeks thereafter;

d) Ad interim orders in terms of the prayers above;

e) Such further and/or other order or orders be passed, direction or directions be given as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”

5. G.A. 6 of 2023 is filed by the mother of the deceased Deepak Sen, who is also the petitioner in PLA 8 of 2018. The applicant contends that in the proceeding for grant of letters of administration, the applicant filed a petition on 11th January, 2018, seeking for an order of injunction restraining the respondent, being the widow of the deceased, from dealing with the assets of the deceased. Upon receipt of the aforesaid application, the respondent on 18th January, 2018, filed a caveat in terms of Rule 24 of Chapter XXXV of the Original Side Rules of the High Court at Calcutta in the instant proceeding. As per the extant of the rule of the Original Side, the time to file affidavit in support of caveat expired on 26th January, 2018. Admittedly, no caveat was filed within the said prescribed time nor any application for extension of such time within the prescribed period was filed by the respondent. On 25th January, 2018, upon hearing both sides, this Hon’ble Court was pleased to pass an order restraining the parties from dealing with the assets of the deceased, however, allowing the respondent to operate the bank accounts and withdraw such sums as may be necessary for the welfare and sustenance of the minor child. The said order was subsequently modified on 7th February, 2018, permitting the respondent to withdraw such sum f