Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 3088 (MAD)

R. Saravanan v. R. Suguna

2021-11-12

ABDUL QUDDHOSE

body2021
JUDGMENT : ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J. Prayer: Original Petition filed under Sections 222 and 276 of Indian Succession Act XXXIX of 1925 read with Under Order XXV Rule 5 of O.S. Rules, praying that petitioner may be permitted to prove the Will in common form and that probate thereof to have effect limited to the State of Tamil Nadu may be granted. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for probate of the Will dated 12.09.2013 executed by V. Ramadass, who died on 24.07.2015. 2. The petitioner is the son of the deceased Ramadass and the first respondent is his wife and the second and third respondents are his children. Under the Will dated 12.09.2013, the respondents 2 and 2 were the attesting witnesses. Before the learned Master, the petitioner was examined as a witness (PW-1) and one of the attesting witnesses, namely, the second respondent was also examined as a witness (PW-2). 3. Before the learned Master, the following documents were marked as Exhibits on the side of the petitioner: Exhibits Nature of the document Ex.P-1 Will dated 12.09.2013 executed by V. Ramadass (deceased) Ex.P-2 Death Certificate of V. Ramadass Ex.P-3 Legal Heirship Certificate of V. Ramadass Ex.P-4 Original Property Tax Demand Card standing in the name of V. Ramadass Ex.P-5 Affidavit of Assets showing the net value of the asset of Rs. 89,70,000/- Ex.P-6 Consent Affidavit given by the respondents 4. As seen from the evidence available on record, the petitioner and the respondents are the only legal heirs of the deceased V. Ramadass, who has executed a Will dated 12.09.2013 in favour of the petitioner. The respondents have also given consent affidavit stating “no objection” for granting Probate in favour of the petitioner and the consent affidavit has been marked as Ex.P-6 before the learned Master. One of the attesting witnesses, namely, second respondent has also been examined as witness (PW-2) before the learned Master and he confirms the execution of the Will dated 12.09.2013 by V. Ramadass. 5. After perusing and examining the pleadings and the evidence on record as well as after hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant probate as prayed for. 6. Accordingly, Registry is directed to grant “Probate” in respect of the said Will in favour of the petitioner. 5. After perusing and examining the pleadings and the evidence on record as well as after hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant probate as prayed for. 6. Accordingly, Registry is directed to grant “Probate” in respect of the said Will in favour of the petitioner. As undertaken by the petitioner in paragraph 10 of the petition, the petitioner shall duly administer the properties and credits of the deceased V. Ramadass in any way concerning his Will by paying first his debts and the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the assets will extend and to make full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same before this Court within six months from the date of issuance of Probate by the Registry of this Court and also to render before this Court a true and proper account of the said properties and credits within one year from the date of issuance of Probate by the Registry of this Court.