ORDER :

1. Challenge to this Appeal is the order dated 26.03.2019 passed by the District Judge, Raipur in unregistered case No.0/2019 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') (wrongly mentioned therein as Section 222 of the Act) for grant of probate of Will has been rejected holding it to be not maintainable as the same has been executed in relation to the properties situated beyond the territorial jurisdiction provided under clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57 of the Act.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order impugned as passed by the Court below rejecting the application filed under Section 276 of the Act holding it to be not maintainable is apparently contrary to law. According to him, the issuance of certificate for grant of probate of Will executed in relation to the properties, which are beyond the territorial jurisdiction provided under clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57 of the Act is although not required to be issued necessarily but, it is an optional one. Therefore, in absence of any specific bar, the application for grant of probate of Will ought not to have been rejected and the same cannot be held to be not maintainable.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the entire papers annexed with this appeal carefully.

4. A deed of Will dated 07.10.2016 was executed by one Smt. Ginni Devi in favour of her son Suresh Goel, the appellant herein, and his brothers and sisters. The properties, which were bequeathed to the appellant, were situated at Timber Market, Fafadih, Raipur and also at village Jalso of Raipur District. Based upon the alleged Will, an application enumerated under Section 276 of the Act has been made by the appellant seeking grant of probate of the alleged Will. The application so made was rejected by the trial Court while referring to the provisions prescribed under Section 57 and 213 of the Act. It has been observed by the trial Court that the alleged Will was executed in relation to the properties, which do not fall within the territorial jurisdiction as provided under clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57 of the Act, therefore, it is not necessary to issue the grant of probate of the alleged Will, in view of sub-section (1) of Section 213 of the Act. As a consequence of it, the Court below has rejected the appellant's said application.

5. In order to examine the validity of the aforesaid order rejecting the said application holding it to be not maintainable in view of the provisions prescribed under Sections 57 and 213 of the Act, it is necessary to examine both the provisions, which read as under:-

“57. Application of certain provisions of Part to a class of Wills made by Hindus, etc.- The provisions of this Part which are set out in Schedule III shall, subject to the restrictions and modifications specified therein, apply--

(a) to all Wills and codicils made by any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina, on or after the first day of September, 1870, within the territories which at the said date were subject to the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal or within the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Courts of Judicature at Madras and Bombay; and

(b) to all such Wills and codicils made outside those territories and limits so far as it relates to immovable property situate within those territories or limits; [and

(c) to all Wills and codicils made by any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina on or after the first day of January, 1927, to which those provisions are not applied by clauses (a) and (b):-]

Provided that marriage shall not revoke any such Will or codicil.”

“213. Right as executor or legatee when established.- (1) No right as executor or legatee can be established in any Court of Justice, unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in [India] has granted probate of the Will under which the right is claimed, or has granted letters of administration with the Will or wi