Back
SUGATO MAJUMDAR
In the Goods of Subir Sen – Appellant
Versus
Sarmistha Mukherjee – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The Court: The instant application, namely, GA 1 of 2019 is filed under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for revocation of grant of probate of the last will and testament of the testator Subir Sen.
2. The case made out in the application is that Subir Sen, father of the present Petitioner died intestate on 07/01/1987 at his residence at Kolkata living behind him, his widow being the Respondent no. 1, his son being the Respondent no. 2 and the present Petitioner. At the time of death, the father of the Petitioner was owner of a portion of his ancestral family residence at 114/5/1A, Hazra Road, Kolkata – 700026. Since the applicant was married and living with her husband she did not make any query into the properties of the testator. Disputes and differences arose between the Petitioner on the one hand and the Respondent no. 1 and 2 on the other hand. The present Petitioner filed a declaratory suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Alipore. In course of the suit, in the month of June, 2018 the Petitioner came to know about grant of probate of the last will and testament of her father.
3. When the Petitioner came to know about grant of probate she
(1) Revocation of Probate – Limitations starts from date of grant of probate and not from date of knowledge about probate proceedings.(2) Probate Court is a court of conscience – Approach of a probat....
The explanations under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 are illustrative, allowing for revocation of probate based on just causes not explicitly listed.
The applicant must demonstrate a 'just cause' for revocation of Probate and establish a caveatable interest as per Section 263 of the Succession Act, 1925.
The court ruled that failure to disclose necessary parties with caveatable interest justifies revocation of probate under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act.
Probate grants are judgments in rem, triggering a strict three-year limitation period for revocation, with knowledge of the grant not resetting this period. There was no evidence of fraud or procedur....
Revocation of a probated will requires substantial evidence proving intention to revoke and adherence to legal formality; unregistered wills do not suffice without proof of revocation.
The court emphasized that judicial discretion is crucial in probate revocations, where citation omissions do not automatically justify revocation without substantial proof or timely actions from the ....
The court held that a grant of probate can be revoked if the procedure was defective, especially if necessary parties were not cited, emphasizing the jurisdictional limitations of testamentary procee....
Fraudulent conduct in obtaining probate warrants revocation, as it sullies the course of justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
