IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVISION No.123 of 2024 In CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.32 of 2023 ======================================================

Jyoti Nath, aged 68 years, Gender-Male, Son of late Awadh Bihari, R/o Mohalla-Minapur, P.S.-Hajipur town, Post Office-Hajipur, Dist.-Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Prabhakar Kumar S/o Late Awadh Bihari Singh, Mohalla-Minapur, P.S.-

Hajipur town. Post Office -Hajipur, Dist.-Vaishali.

2. Indradeep Kumar, S/o Rajesh Chandra Suman, Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Minapur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.-Hajipur Town, Dist.-Vaishali (Bihar).

3. Sumandeep Kumar, S/o Rajesh Chandra Suman, Resident of Village/Mohalla-Minapur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.-Hajipur Town, Dist.-Vaishali (Bihar).

4. Saroj Mehta, D/o Late Awadh Bihari Singh, Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Minapur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.-Hajipur Town, Dist.-Vaishali (Bihar).

5. Aruna Sinha, D/o Late Awadh Bihari Singh, Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Minapur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.-Hajipur Town, Dist.-Vaishali (Bihar).

6. Sunita Singh, D/o Late Awadh Bihari Singh Resident of Village/Mohalla-

Minapur, P.O.-Hajipur, P.S.-Hajipur Town, Dist.-Vaishali (Bihar).

7.1. Divya Prateek, Male, aged about 25 years, Son of Late Jaideep Kumar, R/o Mohalla - Minapur, P.O. - Hajipur, P.S. - Hajipur Town, Dist. - Vaishali.

7.2. Shikhar Prateek, Male, aged about-- years, Son of Late Jaideep Kumar, R/o - Mohalla - Minapur, P.O. - Hajipur, P.S. - Hajipur Town, Dist. - Vaishali.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Shukla, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

CAV ORDER

10 19-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party.

2. This civil revision application has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) against order dated 24.09.2022 passed in Probate Case No. 08 of 2020 by the Learned Additional District Judge VII, Vaishali at Hajipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’) wherein the petition dated 28.09.2020, filed by the petitioner herein, raising objection regarding the non-maintainability of the probate case on the ground of limitation has been rejected by the learned Trial Court.

3. The foundational facts, as borne out from the record, are that the testatrix, Smt. Asharfi Devi, is said to have executed a registered Will dated 04.11.2010 in favour of Opposite Party no.1 (Prabhakar Kumar). Smt. Asharfi Devi expired on 25.12.2014. Prior to her death, disputes had arisen with respect to certain sale deeds dated 30.03.2014 and 01.04.2014 allegedly executed in favour of the wife of opposite party no.1, which became the subject matter of Title Suit No. 1145 of 2014. The said suit culminated in a judgment and decree dated 12.02.2020 whereby the sale deeds were declared void and illegal. Thereafter, on 02.03.2020, opposite party no. 1 instituted Probate Case No. 08 of 2020 seeking probate of the aforesaid Will. The petitioner entered appearance and filed an application dated 28.09.2020 questioning the maintainability of the probate proceeding, primarily on the ground that the same was barred by limitation.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Trial Court, vide the impugned order dated 24.09.2022 passed in Probate Case No. 08 of 2020, rejected the application filed by the petitioner questioning the maintainability of the probate proceeding and held that the petition for probate was not barred by limitation. While doing so, the learned Trial Court opined that Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) would not operate as a bar to the institution of the probate case in the facts of the present case, and accordingly directed the proceeding to continue on merits, which order is under ch