Order 1. 23.7.74 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Shrimati Madhabilata Devi had filed the present testamentary case as the sole executrix for the grant of probate of the will executed by Sailendra Nath Mazumdar. The executrix died on the 24th February, 1974 leaving behind her two sons, Sudhindra Nath Mazumdar and Debabarta Mazumdar who are the sole beneficiaries under the will in question. The aforesaid two sons have made an application in this case for being substituted in the present case in place of the original petitioner, namely, their mother. The office has put an objection to the prayer suggesting that the petitioners should rather file a separate application for grant of Letters of Administration and the present application for substitution was not maintainable. 2. The Calcutta High Court has taken a similar view as suggested by the office in the case of Sarat Chandra Banerjee Vs. Mani Mohan Banerjee ILR 36 Cal. 799. In that case the sole executor died during the pendency of probate proceedings. His heir applied for substitution of her name and to have the petition for probate amended by substituting a prayer for Letters of Administration. The prayer was refused on a view that on the death of the executor, there was no survival of that right inasmuch as the probate and letters of administration were distinct relief altogether. The Madras High Court in Govind M. Asrani Vs. Jairam Asraniand another AIR 1963 Mad. 456 has however taken a contrary view and has considered the aforesaid view of the Calcutta High Court in Sarat Chandra Banerjee's case (Supra) and also other cases of that court and other High Courts. According to the view of the Madras High Court, if the sole executrix dies before proving the will, it will be competent for a legatee or any other person interested, to intervene and continue the proceedings to prove the will and obtain letters of administration in his own right. According to the view of the Madras High Court, if the sole executrix dies before proving the will, it will be competent for a legatee or any other person interested, to intervene and continue the proceedings to prove the will and obtain letters of administration in his own right. That High Court also took the view that there can be no objection to an application for an issue of probate being converted into one for the' grant of letters of administration, on the death of the executrix who had died after applying for probate and before it was granted to her, inasmuch as both the proceedings are in the interest of the legatees and the question involved in such proceedings will be the same, namely, about the truth and genuineness of the will, and the person interested to intervene can do well in completing the proceeding as well. In respectful agreement with the view expressed by the learned Judges of the Madras High Court in the aforesaid case, I allow the application for substitution and direct the applicants to be substituted in place of the petitioner and grant them an opportunity to convert the proceeding into one for grant of letters of administration. The contrary view will unnecessarily give rise to multiplicity of proceedings, which should be avoided. Application allowed.