JUDGEMENT 1. This application has been filed by the sole applicant Smt. Mausumi Chowdhury for grant of Letters of Administration under Sections 273 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") with respect to the estate and property belonging to late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar: Late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar who is governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law executed a Will dated 28.9.1972 with respect to her movable and immovable properties. There are four attesting witnesses to the Will. They are Yashwant Lal Jain, Ranjit Kumar Ghosh, Shailendra Nath Sarkar and Dr. A.K. Narayan. The testatrix i.e. late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar had one daughter Priti Chowdhury who alongwith her husband predeceased Jogmaya Sarkar. Priti Chowdhury left behind one son Prabir Kumar Chowdhury and a daughter Hashi Mitra. Hashi Mitra also died leaving behind her husband and three sons as her heirs. The heirs of Hashi Mitra have been described as the near relations of the applicant. The applicant in this case is the wife of Prabir Kumar Chowdhury. 2. In terms of the different provisions of the Act, general citation was published in two local newspapers, namely, Dainik Aaj on 4th February, 2008 and the Hindustan Times on 5th February, 2008. The heirs of Hashi Mitra appeared in this case and filed a vakalatnama on 14.3.2008. On behalf of the heirs of Hashi Mitra, several dates were given to the Counsel of the near relatives to file a caveat/objection, however, no steps were taken by the heirs of Hashi Mitra to file a caveat/objection in this case and finally on 10.7. 2008 the Court ordered that the matter should proceed in accordance with law and as such, this matter has came up for final hearing. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the witnesses 1 to 3 as described in paragraph no. 2 of the application are now dead and witness no. 4 i.e. Dr. A.K. Narayan could not be traced. Learned Counsel refers to Section 69 of the Indian Evidence Act and submits that the document i.e. Will has to be proved by someone who is in a position to identify the attestations/signatures on the Will. Accordingly, the applicant was successful in producing the son of Shailendra Nath Sarkar, one of the witnesses to the Will to identify the signature of his father. Accordingly, the applicant was successful in producing the son of Shailendra Nath Sarkar, one of the witnesses to the Will to identify the signature of his father. A.W. 2 not only identified the signature of his father but also of another attesting witness, namely, Ranjit Kumar Ghosh. It is thus submitted that the signatures of the attesting witnesses have been duly identified in terms of the provisions of Section 69 of the Indian Evidence Act. The signature of the testator has been identified by the applicant AW-1 who has examined herself in this case as a witness. 4. Regarding the facts with respect to the provisions of the Will, it has been stated that originally the Will contained several properties which have now shrunk and revolve around a water body situated in the town of Patna. It is further submitted that AW-2 Pradip Sarkar is also a co-sharer in the said water body. As far as the claims of the heirs of Hashi Mitra are concerned, it appears that they have lost interest in the matter as they have not appeared after filing their vakalatnama to file objection in this case. As such, it is submitted and it appears to this Court that there is no objection on behalf of any of the person concerned with respect to the provisions of the Will and there also appears to be no evidence to indicate that the Will was executed on account of any undue influence. 5. It would be proper to refer the conditions as stated in the Will. It appears that late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar had Willed half of her share which she received after the death of her husband to Prabir Kumar Chowdhury who was her grandson. 5. It would be proper to refer the conditions as stated in the Will. It appears that late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar had Willed half of her share which she received after the death of her husband to Prabir Kumar Chowdhury who was her grandson. It has also been stated in the Will that "If per chance, which God forbids Prabir Kumar predeceased me (a) as a bachelor I give and bequeath my half share in the entire immovable properties left behind by my late husband to Ram Krishna Mission, Patna and Gaudiya Math in equal proportion, (b) leaves one or more children then the said great grand child or children shall take an absolute heritable and transferable state in my half share in all immovable properties left behind by my late husband, (c) leaves behind wife only then my half share in the entire immovable properties left behind by my late husband will vest in equal proportion between the wife of Prabir Kumar, Ram Krishna Mission and Gaudiya Math, Patna. 6. As per chance, conditions (a) and (b) did not apply in this case and the condition (c) is applicable as Prabir Kumar Chowdhury has died since the execution of the Will leaving behind his wife who is the applicant in this case. The wife of Prabir Kumar Chowdhury has been bequeathed one third share and the rest two third shares, one third each will be in favour of Ram Krishna Mission and Gaudiya Math, Patna. 7. Let the Letters of Administration annexing the copy of the Will dated 28.9.1972 executed by late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar be granted in favour of the applicant which shall have the effect throughout the territory of India.