The court ruled that an unregistered Will must overcome all reasonable suspicions, especially if filed long after the testator's death, failing which the grant of letter of administration cannot be sustained.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 6.

2. This appeal has been filed under Section 299 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT , wherein, the challenged is made to the judgment and order dated 25.05.2017 passed in Letter of Administration Case No.08 of 2016, passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII, Ranchi and further challenge is made with regard to grant of letter of administration vide order dated 15.07.2017 in favour of Sri Dharmender Kumar-respondent no.1.

3. Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the appellant submits that respondent no.1 approached the learned Court under the provision of Section 278 of the Indian SUCCESSION ACT and sought for grant of letter of administration of the Will executed by Malti Devi, who left for her heavenly abode on 29.09.2004 by filing Letter of Administration Case No.08 of 2016. He further submits that the said letter of administration case was moved through the application, affidavited on 16.02.2016, wherein, respondent no.1 has claimed that one Malti Devi, wife of Late Sita Nath Upadhay had acquired some immovable property in the district of Ranchi, Village Rani Bagicha, Road No.4, Kati Tand, Ratu, P.O. & P.S. Ratu, District- Ranchi, which are as under:

(i) 0.4 decimals through deed no. 1175, dated 11.08.1987 in the district of Ranchi.

(ii) 3 decimals through deed no. 11857 dated 02.11.1992.

(iii) 1.27 decimals through deed no. 9044 dated 03.10.2009.

(iv) 1.36 decimals through deed no. 4460 dated 14.09.2010.

4. Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant further submits that respondent no.1 has prayed for grant of letter of administration in relation to the unregistered Will entered into by the said Malti Devi, whom he claims to be as his mother. He then submits that the said Malti Devi had three sons, namely, Dharmender Kumar, Premendra Kumar and Jitender Kumar and three daughters, namely, Mrs. Rekha Mishra, Mrs. Punam Devi and Mrs. Nilam Kumari Pandey and her brother-in-law is Kashi Nath Upadhay. Malti Devi was married to Sita Nath Upadhay and, thus, they are mother and father of the appellant along with respondent nos. 1 to 5. He submits that respondent no.1 has claimed in the said application that one registered Will was executed by his so-called father, being Will dated 30.12.1987, wherein, he has declared that the property after his death will devolve upon his wife, i.e. Malti Devi and after her death, the property will be equally divided into his son Premendra Kumar and his nephews, Dharmender Kumar and Jitender Kumar and that registered Will was created as final Will of the said Sita Nath Upadhay, which has been exhibited and marked as Ext.-5 on behalf of respondent no.1. He also submits that respondent no.1 has claimed that Malti Devi had executed unregistered Will dated 31.05.2003 and he has prayed for grant of letter of administration through this unregistered Will. The death certificate of Malti Devi was brought on record, which has been marked as Ext.1. He further submits that after the notice in the said case, the appellant appeared and filed his written statement and controverted the statements made in the plaint, wherein, any relationship between Sita Nath Upadhay and respondent no.1 has been categorically denied and his father has stated that the appellant is the sole son of Late Sita Nath Upadhay and the appellant has taken ground of fake and suspicious document and it was also