JUDGMENT McNair, J. - This is an application for the revocation of a grant of probate of a Will of the late Jagannath Das dated the 24th of September, 1941. The applicant alleges that Jagannath Das made a subsequent Will on November 9th, 1941, of which he was appointed the sole executor. Jagannath Das died on December 18th, 1941. The application is opposed by the executor of the first Will who contends that the procedure adopted is incorrect. I am satisfied that in a case of this nature the proper procedure is for the propounder of the subsequent Will to apply for probate of that Will. In such application he must observe all the rules which are laid down by the Original Side Rules when an ordinary application is made for probate. 2. In the application he will no doubt mention that there is already another Will of which probate has been granted and will apply for revocation of the first Will. The revocation of that Will cannot be granted until the Petitioner has proved that his Will is a valid subsequent Will which revokes the prior Will but the onus is on the Petitioner to prove the Will which he sets up and show just cause for revoking the probate which has already been granted. 3. The learned Counsel for the Opposite Party has referred to the case Phillips v. Alcock [1755] 2 Lee 97, where the Court refused to revoke the grant of administration which was issued until the Will of the deceased had been proved in due form of law. There has been some discussion as to the proper procedure to be adopted in circumstances of this nature and there has been some doubt as to whether the procedure should be by application or by suit. I am satisfied that the proper procedure is for the executor of the second Will to apply for probate of that Will and to pray at the same time for revocation of the Will of which probate has already been issued. That was apparently the procedure adopted in the goods of Tara-moni Dassi ILR 25 Cal : 553 (1898). When the application is made all the formalities prescribed by the rules for an application for probate must be observed. That was apparently the procedure adopted in the goods of Tara-moni Dassi ILR 25 Cal : 553 (1898). When the application is made all the formalities prescribed by the rules for an application for probate must be observed. They have not been observed in this application and the Petitioner is given leave to withdraw this application with leave to bring a fresh application as directed. Costs of this application will be reserved. The fresh application must be made within a fortnight. In default this application is dismissed with costs.