2006 Supreme(All) 1286
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sunil Ambwani, J.
Varshney Sabha Prayag
Versus
Muni Varshney widow of Late Captain Jagdish Chandra Varshney
Testamentary Suit 2 of 2003
Decided On : 28 April 2006
Testamentary Suit 2 Of 2003
A.N.BHARGAVA, ARCHANA VARSHNEY, Navin Sinha, V.P.Varshney,
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a registered society, being an association of individuals, is not entitled to the grant of letters of administration under Section 236 of the Indian Succession Act 1925.
Headnote:
Indian Succession Act 1925 - Grant of Letters of Administration - Section 236
Fact of the Case:
The suit involved a dispute over the grant of letters of administration to a registered society under Section 236 of the Indian Succession Act 1925. The deceased had left a will bequeathing his property to the society, which sought letters of administration.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the society, being an association of individuals, was not entitled to the grant of letters of administration as per Section 236 of the Indian Succession Act 1925. The suit was dismissed on this basis.
Issues: The main issue was whether a registered society could be granted letters of administration under Section 236 of the Indian Succession Act 1925.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 236, which prohibits the grant of letters of administration to certain classes of persons, including associations of individuals. The court held that the society, being an association of individuals, did not meet the criteria for the grant of letters of administration.
Final Decision: The suit was dismissed, and the court observed that it had not considered the validity of the due execution of the unregistered will dated 11. 10. 1998.
( 1 ) WITH consent of parties, the following issues were framed as preliminary issue to be decided before framing further issues; whether in view of Section 236 of the Indian Succession Ad 1925, letters of Administration can he granted of the estate of the deceased to a registered society.
( 2 ) HEARD Shri Virendra Pal Varshney, learned Counsel for the plaintiff and Shri Navin Sinha, senior Advocate for Archana Varshney, heir and legal representative of Smt. Muni varshney-caveator and the widow of Cap. Jagdish Chandra Varshney, the deceased-testator, whose will dated 26. 9. 1999 is sought to be administered by the plaintiff.
( 3 ) BRIEF facts giving rise to the Suit as stated in the pleadings are that Captain Jagdish Chandra varshney (the deceased), son of late Shri Tej Pal Varshney, resident of 44/41 Dilkusha Naya katra, Lajpatra Rai Marg, Allahabad died on 21. 12. 1998 leaving behind his widow Smt. Munni varshney and caveator Sri Gyanendra Kumar. The deceased did not leave behind him any children. Shri Varshney Sabha Prayag, registration No. 1025/1990 through its Secretary Krishna murari Lal Gupta, son of late Madan Mohan Lal Gupta, R/o 1/10. B. K. Banerjee Marg, Naya katra, Allahabad filed the Testamentary Case No. 17 of 1998, which has been converted into testamentary Suit No. 2 of 2003 for grant of probate of the will dated 11. 10. 1998 executed by the deceased by which he has bequeathed his self acquired house No. 44 Dilkusha Naya Katra. Allahabad, for the office and dharmshala of Varshney Sabha. Prayag. The will states that deceased retired as Deputy Labour Commissioner in 1987. He has given half of his service dues to his wife to Smt. Munni and the remaining to his nephew Gyanendra Kumar. He had married smt. Shanti Devi. He did not have any issue from her and divorced her. He entered into second marriage with Smt. Munni but he did not have any children from her, as well. The will slates that smt. Munni did not treat him well and that he was suffering from several deceases. She had kept her sisters grand-daughter Archana with her without executing the adoption deed or any document. Archana also was not treating him well and had married a boy against his wishes causing loss to his reputation. The deceased has in the will allowed Smt. Munni. who retired from Education Department the use of all his movable and immovable properties including cash: jewellery; Maruti car; Priya Scooter and households articles detailed in the will. The deceased expressed his happiness over the attitude of his nephew Gyanendra Kumar and his wife Smit shashi Bala and allowed him to be owner of the investments made by the deceased jointly with him. It is further stated in the will that the deceased was Zonal President of Vishwa Hindu parishad and thereafter Vice President of Bhartiya Janata Party. He was elected as President of varshney Sabha Prayag continuously for four years and was actively engaged in the activities of varshney Sabha which has no office or building of its own and thus he desires to bequeath all his properties except those which he had given to Smt. Munni to Varshney Sabha Prayag. The will was witnessed by Shri Jagdish Chandra Dixit and Shri Aditya Narayan Singh.
( 4 ) THE plaint encloses death certificate of the deceased; an affidavit of Shri Jagdish Chandra dixit, the attesting witnesses and schedule of properties with its valuation.
( 5 ) A caveat application was filed by late Smt. Munni Varshney through Shri Navin Sinha and shri Vipin Sinha, Advocate. In her counter affidavit filed on 27. 9. 1999, she has stated that the deceased had along with her adopted Archana Varshney, who is now aged about 26 years. He was brought up and educated by the deceased. He did not execute any will. The alleged document is forged and fabricated, set up by Gyanendra Kumar in collusion with attesting witnesses. The will does not bear the signature of late Shri Jagdish Chandra Varshney. They were married in 1960 alter he had div