2004 Supreme(All) 288
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
A. K. YOG, V. N. SINGH
BLMLA GALNDHAR - Appellant
Versus
UMA GALNDHER - Respondents
F. A. F. O. 391 Of 1996
Decided On : 02/17/2004
K.L.GROVER, R.K.AVASTHI, RAMESH SINGH
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the requirement of probate is determined by the categories specified in the Indian Succession Act, and the applicability of Section 213 is limited to specific cases.
Headnote:
Indian Succession Act 1925 - Probate - Sections 57, 213, 214, 370, 372, 387
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed a petition for grant of Probate on the basis of an unregistered will. The court analyzed whether a Hindu is required to obtain a Probate in the State of U. P. in case of a will in his favor.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no probate was required in the present case as the will did not fall under the categories specified in the Act. The court referred to relevant sections of the Indian Succession Act and previous judgments to support its decision.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant is required to claim probate on the basis of the will. The court also discussed the applicability of various sections of the Indian Succession Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that no probate was required for the will in question as it did not fall under the specified categories in the Act. The court also emphasized the applicability of Section 213 and the conditions under which probate is required.
Final Decision: The First Appeal from Order was dismissed with no order as to costs.
( 1 ) ABOVE First Appeal from order under Section 299 of the Indian Succession act 1925, called the Act filed by Smt. Bimla Galndhar is against the judgment and order dated March 12th, 1966 passed by IHrd addl. District Judge, Saharanpur, deciding issue No. 3, viz. (whether a hindu is required to obtain a Probate in the State of U. P. in case of a will in his favour ?)
( 2 ) SMT. Bimla Gaindhar (appellant before us) had filed a petition under Section 276 of the Act for grant of Probate on the basis of purported will, an unregistered document (paper No. 10-A1 on original record ).
( 3 ) WE are omitting to give other details as the same is not required for the purpose of deciding the issue in hand and for disposal of the present first appeal from order.
( 4 ) ACCORDING to the impugned judgment and order dated March 12, 1996, Learned addl. District Judge came to the conclusion, relying upon two single Judge reported decisions by he bench of learned single Judge, air 1978 All 268 (Bhaiya Ji v. Jageshwar dayal Bajpaai) and AIR 1978 All 301 (Smt. Pitamo v. Shayam Singh) that no probate was required in the facts of the instant case and consequently held that the proceedings on the basis of the will for seeking letter of probate are misconceived since the Will in question did not fall in either of the category contemplated under clauses (a) or (b) of Section 57 read with Section 213 of the Act.
( 5 ) THE sole question required to be decided in the instant case is whether the appellant is required to claim probate on the basis of will dated November 2. 1991 (Paper no. 10a1) attached with the probate petition it is to be noted that the deceased chandra Shekhar Galndher according to the applicant executed a will (unregistered) and after his death bestowed his all rights in his movable and immovable properties and other household goods in favour of her mother Smt. Bimla Gaindher/appellant and further that his wife of the deceased Smt. Usha Gaindher to have no right under said will.
( 6 ) THERE is no dispute that movable and immovable properties of Chandra Shekhar gaindher deceased, (the subject-matter of the said Will) are situate outside territories and have not been subject to the Lieutenant-Gov-ernor of Bengal or within the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the high Courts of Judicature at Madras and bombay. The parties to the will admittedly are hindus.
( 7 ) FOR convenience of the Court, Sections 57,313, 214, 370, 372 and 387 of the Act, which are relevant for the present appeal, are reproduced below: 57. Application of Certain provisions of part to a class of Wills made by Hindus, etc. The provisions of this part which are set in schedule III, shall subject to the restrictions and modifications specified therein, apply (A) to all Wills and codicils made by any hindu, Budhhist, Sikh or Jaina, on or after the first day of September, 1870 within the territories which at the said date where subject to the Lientenant-Governor of Bengal or within the local limits of the ordinary original civil Jurisdiction of the High Courts of judicature at Madras and Bombay; (b) to all such Wills and codicils made outside those territories and limits so far as 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 with a copy of an authenticated copy of the Will annexed. (2) This section shall not apply in the case of Will made by Muhammadans, and