Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1049 (DEL)

Surinder Kumar Malhotra v. State

2011-12-07

A.K.PATHAK

body2011
A.K. Pathak, J. (Oral) 1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the Act") seeking probate of the Will dated 26th June, 1997 left behind by Late Smt. Leela Vohra, daughter of Shri Bishan Singh. 2. It is alleged that Smt. Leela Vohra died on 26th October, 2009. Before her death she executed a Will dated 26th June, 1997, which was duly registered in the office of Sub-Registrar III vide registration No. 2598, Additional Book No. III, Volume No. 992 at pages 86-91 on 7th July, 1997. Late Smt. Leela Vohra bequeathed her moveable and immoveable properties, as shown in "Schedule-I" annexed with the plaint, in the manner as detailed in the Will. The testatrix has appointed the petitioner and Ms. Neeru Abrol, as joint executors of the Will. The Will was drafted by Mr. S.D. Banda, Advocate r/o B-42, Defence Colony, New Delhi - 110024 and was witnessed by Ms. Neeru Abrol, Mr. C. P. Malhotra, Dr. Bimal K. Chhajer and Ms. Santosh Mehta. Late Smt. Leela Vohra was of sound and disposing mind at the time of executing the Will. 3. Initially legal heirs of testatrix were not impleaded as respondents. On the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, all the legal heirs of the deceased were impleaded as respondent Nos. 2 to 12. All the legal heirs, that is, respondent Nos. 2 to 12 have filed their respective affidavits stating therein that they have no objection if the probate of Will dated 26th June, 1997 is granted in favour of the petitioner. 4. Citation has been published in the newspapers "The Times of India" English edition and "Navbharat Times" Hindi edition, both dated 9th June, 2010. No one has preferred any objection opposing the grant of probate of the Will in question. 5. After service of notice on the respondent No. 1 (State). Mr. R.K. Taneja, Junior Engineer working in the office of SDM Saket, appeared in Court on 30th August, 2010 and produced the valuation report dated 28th August, 2010, which is on record. 6. Petitioner has been examined as PW1. He has tendered his affidavit in evidence. He has supported the averments made in the petition. He has proved the Death Certificate of Late Smt. Leela Vohra issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) as Ex. 6. Petitioner has been examined as PW1. He has tendered his affidavit in evidence. He has supported the averments made in the petition. He has proved the Death Certificate of Late Smt. Leela Vohra issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) as Ex. PW1/A. He has deposed that deceased has left behind her last Will and Testament dated 26th June, 1997 duly registered with the office of Sub-Registrar, New Delhi. Certified copy of the Will dated 26th June, 1997 is Ex. PW2/A. Petitioner has deposed that he along with Ms. Neeru Abrol has been named as an executor. Will was executed in presence of the attesting witnesses, namely, Ms. Neeru Abrol, Mr. C. P. Malhotra, Dr. Bimal K. Chhajer and Ms. Santosh Mehta and was drafted by Sh. S.D. Banda, Advocate. Schedule of the properties has been exhibited as Ex. PW1/B. Smt. Santosh Mehta, is one of the attesting witnesses and has stepped in the witness box as PW2. She has tendered her affidavit in evidence. She has deposed that she had signed the Will dated 26th June, 1997 executed by Smt. Leela Vohra, as one of the attesting witnesses in the presence of the testatrix and other attesting witnesses; she had seen the testatrix and other attesting witnesses signing the said Will in her presence at the same time. She reiterated that she had signed the Will Ex. PW2/A at point `X' at the request of testatrix. She further deposed that Late Smt. Leela Vohra appeared before the Sub-Registrar in her presence who enquired from her about the contents of Will Ex. PW2/A. Ms. Neeru Abrol has also filed her affidavit in evidence stating therein that she was an attesting witness to the Will dated 26th June, 1997. She has deposed that she is one of the joint executors with the petitioner but she has no objection in case a probate is granted in favour of the petitioner. During the course of hearing, it is contended that Ms. Neeru Abrol is not interested in executing the Will dated 26th June, 1997, therefore, probate be granted in favour of other executor, that is, petitioner. 7. During the course of hearing, it is contended that Ms. Neeru Abrol is not interested in executing the Will dated 26th June, 1997, therefore, probate be granted in favour of other executor, that is, petitioner. 7. In the above facts, I do not find any impediment in accepting the Will (Ex.PW2/A) executed by Late Smt. Leela Vohra and grant probate of the same to the petitioner, subject to payment of necessary court fee and furnishing administrative and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Registrar General.