The High Court possesses jurisdiction to grant letters of administration under the Indian Succession Act but may decline to exercise this discretion based on appropriate jurisdictional considerations.

1. The present petition filed under S.276 and S.278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is for grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed. The petitioner, Smt. Kanta claims to be widow of Sukhdev Singh Sandhu alias S. Sukhdev who died at Delhi on or about first day of March 1979. According to the petitioner, Sukhdev Singh Sandhu left her as his widow, a daughter Ms. Shabnam and mother Smt. Harnam Kaur.

2. Further, as alleged by the petitioner, the deceased left a Will dated 22nd February 1979 in favour of the former and by virtue of that Will, she is entitled to the entire property of the deceased.

3. The petition was filed in February 1983 which was about four years after the death of Sukhdev Singh Sandhu. The explanation for delayed filing of the petition, as given in the petition, is that Smt. Shaminder G. Bathra, a sister of the deceased, had been litigating with the petitioner at Ludhiana and Bombay in connection with the property of the deceased.

4. A notice of the petition was issued to Ms. Shabnam, (by) the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority and to the general public by way of publication of notice in Hindustan Times. No objections were filed except by Mrs. Shaminder G. Bathra, a sister of the deceased, who even filed a caveat No. 6 of 1983. She (Smt. Shaminder G. Bathra) contested the grant of letters of administration to the petitioner. She denied that there was any execution of the Will in favour of the petitioner. She also denied that the petitioner is the widow of Sukhdev Singh Sandhu. She states that the petitioner was married to Prem Chand son of Shri Roop Chand and that out of that wedlock one daughter Nisha was born who is still alive.

5. The case of Smt. Shaminder G. Bathra, objector, is that at the time of death of Sukhdev Singh Sandhu, his mother Smt. Harnam Kaur was the only heir, that Smt. Harnam Kaur executed a Will on 20th May 1980 in her (Smt. Shaminder G. Bathra) favour and that, therefore, after the death of Harnam Kaur, she became the owner of the entire property left by Sukhdev Singh Sandhu.

6. She also pleaded that the courts at Delhi had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the petition because Sukhdev Singh Sandhu had a permanent abode at Bombay and did not have such an abode in the union territory of Delhi.

7. Following preliminary issues were framed by H. C. Goel, J. on 30th August 1984:
1. Whether the courts at Delhi have got jurisdiction to entertain the petition and grant the relief as prayed for?
2. Whether in view of the provisions of S.271 and S.273 of the Indian Succession Act, the petition should be heard and decided by this Court?

8. Issue No. 1
The relevant provision regarding territorial jurisdiction is S.270 of the Indian Succession Act which reads as under :
"270. When probate or administration may be granted by District Judge. - Probate of the Will or letters of administration to the estate of a deceased person may be granted by a District Judge under the seal of his Court, if it appears by a petition, verified as hereinafter provided, of the person applying for the same that the testator or intestate, as the case may be, at the time of his decease had a fixed place of abode, or any property, movable or immovable, within the jurisdiction of the Judge."
It is, therefore, clear that in order that a Court may have territorial jurisdiction, the deceased should have either a fixed place of abode or movable or immovable