1. - This misc. Application has been filed by the petitioner, one of the legatees, under Section 301 and 302 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, hereafter referred to as the Act. Though the application is long one, however the prayer made is, that Shri Arvind Singh Mewar be removed as executor of the Will of testator, and that the petitioner, and/or some other person be appointed as executor of the Will, other relief has also been claimed, that certain shares issued to certain companies without administering the Will are liable to be cancelled, or in the alternative some declaration is sought for. Then it is prayed, that the respondent no.1 (Shri Arvind Singh Mewar) be ordered to be prosecuted for various offences committed by him as executor of the Will, and some more directions have been prayed for.

2. The relevant allegations are, that in the Will, the testator had appointed the executors, being Shri Arvind Singh Mewar, the respondent no.1, and late Shri A. Subramaniam. It is alleged that after grant of probate, the executor ought to have administered/executed the Will by giving effect to its various provisions, but instead, the respondent no.1 has been using/abusing the grant of probate in his favour to further his own individual interests, to the great detriment of the estate of the testator, and the beneficiaries thereunder, and is systematically acting in the manner, claiming to be proprietor of the estate. It is also alleged, that after the death of A. Subramaniam steps have not been taken for filling up the vacancy. According to the petitioner, if the respondent no.1 is allowed to continue as executor of the Will, the day is not far off when nothing will be left in the Will to administer, since by that time the executor, in his individual capacity, will acquire exclusive and complete control of the estate. Then, some details are pleaded regarding the acts done by the respondent qua different properties. Reference has been made to certain company petition proceedings as well. It is alleged, that by the conduct of respondent no.1, he has rendered himself liable for removal as executor forthwith.

3. This application was filed in the year 2005. Then, vide order dated 9.12.2005 notice of this application as well as of interim application, were issued. A bulk of documents have also been filed along with the application.

4. A reply to this application has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 in January, 2006, alleging interalia, that this respondent is the son of eldest brother of the executor, and owing to various compulsions his father had to file a suit for partition of the estate, being suit no. 243/2004, wherein status quo order/ injunctions have been issued by the District Court, which have been affirmed by the High Court, and Hon'ble the Supreme Court since 23.4.83, extracts thereof have been produced as Annexure B, annexed to the reply. According to this Annexure-B, District Court, Udaipur vide order dated 2.12.1985 restrained Shri Arvind Singh from disposing and/or alienating or otherwise dealing with the suit properties, till the decision of the suit, and the High Court, vide order dated 11.6.93 further restrained Shri Arvind Singh as an executor of the Will, his agents, servants or officers, from disposing and/or alienating, or otherwise dealing with the suit properties, till the decision of the suit, and Hon'ble the Supreme Court passed the order dated 3.11.1992, directing Shri Arvind Singh, to maintain status quo, and not to make any structural alteration, in the building in question. Then, vide order dated 2.4.93, Hon'ble the Supreme Court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 8 months from that date. Few more orders have been detailed in this Annexure-B, which need not detain me. Certain observations made in the order of the grant of probate have also been reproduced. Then, disputes have been raised about validity of the Will, its workability,