2026 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 2010

Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, J
Santsaran Gursaran Advani – Appellant
Versus
Nina H. Bhalla – Respondent
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.26854 OF 2025|SUIT NO.248 OF 2025

A plaintiff in an administration suit must establish a prima facie caveatable interest in the estate. Absent such interest, and where a valid probate has been granted to an executrix, the plaintiff is not entitled to interim relief if the statutory order of succession excludes them from inheritance.

Headnote:(A) Hindu Succession Act, 1956 - Sections 15 and 16 - General rules of succession in case of female Hindus - Property devolving upon heirs - Plaintiff seeking interim reliefs in administration suit failed to show prima facie interest - Under Section 15(1), order of preference excludes subsequent entries - Where husband of deceased predeceased her, and his sister survived, such heir falls under earlier entry and excludes plaintiff (heir of father) - Constitutionality of Section 15(1) not having been set aside or declared unconstitutional by higher benches, it continues to hold the field. (Paras 58-61, 64-68)

(B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VII, Rule 11 - Maintainability of suit - Burden on plaintiff to establish caveatable interest - In absence of prima facie interest in estate, plaintiff not entitled to interim status quo or appointment of receiver - Grant of probate by competent court vests property in executor, precluding interim reliefs to one without proven legal entitlement. (Paras 72-73, 77-79)

(C) Interim Relief - Principles governing grant - Court must record prima facie satisfaction regarding maintainability before granting protection, specifically when threshold legal bars are raised. (Paras 82-84)

Facts of the case:
The plaintiff, claiming to be the brother of the deceased, filed an administration suit seeking to declare a gift deed void and to claim entitlement to the estate. The defendant, acting as executrix, obtained probate of the deceased's will. The plaintiff sought urgent interim reliefs including appointment of a court receiver and injunctions against the defendant. The core dispute involves the order of succession under the succession law and whether the plaintiff has a caveatable interest to maintain the suit and claim interim protections.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the statutory order of succession under the relevant act clearly gives precedence to heirs of the husband over heirs of the father in the absence of children. The contention that these provisions are unconstitutional was rejected as no such binding declaration exists from the relevant appellate forums. Consequently, the plaintiff lacks prima facie title to the estate, rendering the prayers for interim relief unsustainable.

Issues: Whether the plaintiff established a prima facie caveatable interest in the estate of the deceased, and whether interim reliefs can be granted in an administration suit where the status of the plaintiff as a legal heir is barred by the statutory order of succession.

Ratio Decidendi: A plaintiff in an administration suit must demonstrate a prima facie interest in the estate to be entitled to interim relief. Given the statutory scheme of succession, where an heir falling under an earlier entry in the list of succession exists, the plaintiff having no such entitlement cannot seek to restrain the rightful executor who has already obtained probate of the testament.

Result: Interim Application dismissed.