The appeals challenge orders of the Calcutta High Court Division Bench refusing to discharge caveats filed against a probate petition propounded by the appellant, the surviving sister of the testator Jagdish Prasad Tulshan. [1000586870001][1000586870002][1000586870003] Respondent Yasheel Jain, son of a pre-deceased sister of the testator, claimed caveatable interest as a nephew and as the sole beneficiary under an alleged prior Will. [1000586870001][1000586870002] A Single Judge rejected the propounder's objection to Yasheel's caveat, holding that a potential heir (not a rank outsider) could maintain it; Yasheel's cross-objection before the Division Bench succeeded on the prima facie existence of the prior Will. [1000586870002] Respondent Malati Tulshan claimed to be the testator's second wife (married 28.02.1986) and filed a separate caveat; Single Judge upheld it

Saroj Agarwalla (Dead) Thr. LR Abhishek Agrawalla vs Yasheel Jain

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(SC) 856

DIPAK MISRA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Saroj Agarwalla (Dead) Thr. LR Abhishek Agrawalla – Appellant
Versus
Yasheel Jain – Respondent

Judgement Key Points

The appeals challenge orders of the Calcutta High Court Division Bench refusing to discharge caveats filed against a probate petition propounded by the appellant, the surviving sister of the testator Jagdish Prasad Tulshan. [1000586870001][1000586870002][1000586870003]
Respondent Yasheel Jain, son of a pre-deceased sister of the testator, claimed caveatable interest as a nephew and as the sole beneficiary under an alleged prior Will. [1000586870001][1000586870002]
A Single Judge rejected the propounder's objection to Yasheel's caveat, holding that a potential heir (not a rank outsider) could maintain it; Yasheel's cross-objection before the Division Bench succeeded on the prima facie existence of the prior Will. [1000586870002]
Respondent Malati Tulshan claimed to be the testator's second wife (married 28.02.1986) and filed a separate caveat; Single Judge upheld it

JUDGMENT

SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J.

1. Both the appeals arise out of same proceedings initiated by the appellant for grant of probate on the basis of a Will claimed to be the last Will and testament of appellant’s brother Jagdish Prasad Tulshan. Appellant’s prayer to reject the caveats of respondents in the above proceedings was turned down by a Division Bench of High Court at Calcutta by impugned orders, both dated 04.05.2007. Both the appeals, therefore, have been heard together and shall be governed by this common judgment.

2. The appellant Saroj Agarwalla is the propounder of a Will, alleged to have been executed by one Jagdish Prasad Tulshan. She claims to be the only surviving sister of the testator at the time of his death. She prayed for grant of the Probate of the Will allegedly executed by Jagdish. The respondent in the first appeal, i.e., C.A.No.473 of 2009 -Yasheel Jain lodged a caveat claiming to be the son of a pre-deceased sister of the testator and thus having interest in the estate of the deceased. His claim is founded on two grounds, firstly as a nephew of the testator and secondly as the sole beneficiary under an alleged prior Will of the testator in respect of the sa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 Supreme(SC) 856

DIPAK MISRA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGHSaroj Agarwalla (Dead) Thr. LR Abhishek Agrawalla – AppellantVersusYasheel Jain – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

DIPAK MISRA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Saroj Agarwalla (Dead) Thr. LR Abhishek Agrawalla – Appellant
Versus
Yasheel Jain – Respondent