1982 Supreme(MP) 171

H. G. Mishra, J.
Chandmal Jain v. Devisingh Rajput.
C. R. No. 788 of 1979 (I); Decided on 5-3-1982.

Headnote:Succession Act, 1925 -- Ss. 57 and 213 -- suit for recovery of loan on the basis of will -- no probate of will is required to maintain the suit.

        No exhaustive statement of facts is necessary for decision of this revision. Suffice it to state that the suit giving rise to this revision has been brought by the plaintiff-applicant for recovery of the loan advanced by Champalal, father of the plaintiff, to the defendant. The plaintiff claimed to be entitled to maintain the suit by virtue of a will executed in his favour by Champalal on 7-7-1977.

        The claim of the plaintiff was resisted by the defendant inter alia on the ground that the plaintiff is not entitled to maintain the suit without obtaining and producing the probate of the will. This objection found favour with the trial Court and the trial Court has by the impugned order directed the plaintiff to obtain and produce probate of the will. Hence this revision.

        In this revision it was contended by Shri M. K. Sharma, learned counsel for the plaintiff-applicant that the impugned order is without jurisdiction, inasmuch as a Hindu will need not be probated, as it falls within the ratio of the decision in Ahmed v. Ghisia Hera (AIR 1945 Nag. 237 ) and Ruprao v. Ramrao (AIR 1152 Nag. 88).

        The present case falls squarely within the dictum of the aforesaid cases As such the aforesaid will not be probated. AIR 194) Nag. 237 and AIR 1952 Nag. 88 relied on. Revision allowed.