Purchasers who are interested in probate proceedings ought to be impleaded.

R. Banumathi, J.

These appeals are directed against the dismissal of applications for revocation of the Letters of Administration granted in O.P.No.157/2001 and declining stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of Letters of Administration granted on 17.09.2001. Since both appeals arose out of common order and questions involved are one and the same, both appeals were heard together.

.2. Brief facts necessiated for disposal of these appeals are as follows:-

.The property in question is the self acquired property of one Purushothaman, who died on 4. 1998, leaving his wife – P.Ranganayaki as the only legal heir. The appellants have purchased the property from the said Ranganayaki under two Sale Deeds dated 15.02.1999 and the appellants are said to be in possession and enjoyment of the property. The respondent, who is the brother of Purushothaman has filed C.S.No.227/ 1999 on 23. 1999 against Ranganayaki as well as the appellants, seeking a Decree for cancellation of two Sale Deeds executed by Ranganayaki and the suit is pending. Respondent has filed O.P.No.157/2001 for the grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the Will dated 20.09.1997 said to have been executed by Purushothaman. Ranganayaki was impleaded as respondent in O.P.No.157/2001. Though O.P.No.157/ 2001 was filed in 1999, it was numbered only in 2001 and in the mean time, Ranganayaki died on 110. 1999. In the O.P., name of Ranganayaki was struck off and Letters of Administration was granted by order dated 17.09.2001. Stating that appellants are purchasers of the property from Ranganayaki and that they have got caveatable interest in the property, appellants have filed applications to revoke the Letters of Administration granted in O.P.No.157/2001 and also sought stay of all further proceedings.

3. Respondent has contested those applications contending that his brother Purushothaman had duly executed Will dated 20.9.1997. Respondent has filed C.S.No.227/1999 for cancellation of the Sale Deeds executed by Ranganayaki in favour of the appellants who have been impleaded as Defendants 1 and 2 in C.S.No.227/1999. In O.P.No.157/ 2001, Public Notice was issued in Newspapers and pendency of O.P. was brought to the notice of the general public. According to the respondents, as per the recitals in the Will, Ranganayaki can have only life interest and that she cannot mortgage or sell the property. Respondent mainly contended that he has proved the Will dated 20.09.1997 to the satisfaction of the Court and only after following the procedure, Letters of Administration was granted and that he has not suppressed any material facts for obtaining Letters of Administration.

.4. Upon consideration of rival contentions, the learned Single Judge has held only if a person is entitled to inherit the property, he can be said to have caveatable interest in the property. Pointing out that already civil suit is pending between the parties, wherein respondent has sought to set aside the Sale Deeds in favour of the appellants, the learned Single Judge held that the appellants have no caveatable interest and on those findings, dismissed the application for revocation of Letters of Administration.

5. Challenging the impugned Order, the learned Senior Counsel Mr. S. Parthasarathy has interalia made the following submissions:-

A person having interest in the property left by the deceased even if it is by subsequent purchase, he has got a right of being heard in the proceedings for grant of Letters of Administration;

The test is whether grant of Letters of Administration displaces any interest acquired by the purchaser and in this case, the grant of Letters of Administration in favour of the respondents has the effect of displacing the right of the appellants.

Even slightest interest in the estate will entitle one to be a party in the probate proceedings.

6. Countering the arguments, the learned Counsel for the respondent has submitted that when civil suit C.S.No.227/19