Probate may be granted to a sole beneficiary without requiring an administration bond under the Indian Succession Act.

J U D G M E N T

MANMOHAN, J (Oral):

1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 276 read with Section 228 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of probate in respect of registered Will dated 31st March, 1992 of deceased Mrs. Sudesh Madan.

2. It has been averred in the petition that the petitioner is a British citizen and the husband of the testatrix, late Mrs. Sudesh Madan, who expired on 08th February, 2011 at Romford, England. The testatrix is stated to have executed a Will dated 31st March, 1992, which was duly attested by Mr.Stuart P. Mallinson and Mr. Rajinder Kumar Jain in England. It is stated that the petitioner is the sole executor of the Will dated 31st March, 1992 executed by his wife late Mrs. Sudesh Madan.

3. It is stated that the testatrix Mrs. Sudesh Madan expired leaving behind no other legal heirs except the petitioner i.e. her husband, respondent no.2 i.e. her son and respondent no.3 i.e. her daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner had filed an application for grant of probate in the United Kingdom and probate was granted in respect of the Will dated 31st March, 1992 to the petitioner by order dated 12th January, 2012 by the High Court of Justice, the District Probate Registry, at Leeds, United Kingdom. However, the said probate cannot have effect over the properties in India in view of Section 5 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 . An authenticated copy of the Will as per Section 228 of the and the probate dated 12th January, 2012 have been enclosed with the petition.

5. Notice was issued in the present petition on 31st May, 2013. Citation was also directed to be issued, which came to be published in the daily newspaper “Hindustan Times”. No objections have been received to the Will after publication of the citation. Notices were duly served on the State.

4. Valuation report has been filed by the State.

5. Respondent nos. 2 and 3, the son and daughter respectively of the petitioner, have filed their affidavits stating that if the present petition for grant of probate is allowed in favour of their father i.e. the petitioner herein, they have no Objection. The relevant portion of the affidavits are reproduced herein below:-

“Affidavit of Respondent No.2

1. That I am the respondent no.2 in the above said petition for probate of the Will dated 31.3.1992 executed by my mother Late Sudesh Madan. I have read the petition and I do not wish to file any reply to the said petition.

2. That I have no objection if the present petition for grant of probate is allowed in favour of my father/petitioner Dr.Surendra Narain Raizada.

3. That I am deposing this affidavit on my own free will and without any coercion or undue influence.

Affidavit of Respondent No.3

1. That I am the respondent no.3 in the above said petition for probate of the Will dated 31.3.1992 executed by my mother Late Sudesh Madan. I have read the petition and I do not wish to file any reply to the said petition.

2. That I have no objection if the present petition for grant of probate is allowed in favour of my father/petitioner Dr.Surendra Narain Raizada.

3. That I am deposing this affidavit on my own free will and without any coercion or undue influence.”

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that during the pendency of the present petition the petitioner filed two amendment applications for deletion of two properties from the list of immovable properties and the same was allowed by this Court vide orders dated 22nd November, 2017 and

04th September, 2018.

7. Learned counsel of the petitioner states that there is no legal impediment in grant of probate in favour of the petitioner in respe