JUDGMENT : 1. The probate of the will of the deceased, Heena Sahney alias Heena Sahani, dated 25th August 1999 granted on 27th November 2019 was revoked by the impugned judgment and order dated 25th February 2021. 2. The appellant is the legatee and sole executrix under the will. The ground on which the probate was revoked by the learned judge was irregularity in issuing citation to the persons having a caveatable interest. 3. The area of contention as to the extent of caveatable interest in these probate proceedings of the testatrix is quite short. 4. There are two contenders. One is the client of Mr. Debnath Ghosh, learned advocate, Kalinath Sasmal, son of Natendra Nath Sasmal who claims to be a half brother of the deceased, the father being common. The other is Mr. Rupak Ghosh’s client, Nabarun Sasmal, son of Nirmalya Shashmal, the brother of the testatrix who died on 28th August 2012. 5. Nabarun has made an application for leave of this court to participate in the proceedings. This application is opposed by Mr. Debnath Ghosh on the ground that Nirmalya Shashmal remained unmarried throughout his life and the applicant Nabarun’s claim as his son is false. 6. One of the standards for identifying a person with a caveatable interest is whether he or she would succeed intestate if the testator or testatrix had died intestate. 7. Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 dealing with the general rules of succession in the case of female Hindu identifies the heirs of the father as one of the possible legal heirs, in case the legal heirs with a much closer relationship with the deceased like son, daughter, husband, mother and father did not survive on the death of the deceased. Section 18 provides that full-blood heirs would have priority over half-blood heirs. 8. There is no dispute that each of the two persons wanting to oppose these probate proceedings classifies as an heir of the father of the deceased. 9. At this stage, in allowing or refusing to allow an application of a person to lodge a caveat, the court should ascertain whether that person has a prima facie caveatable interest. The claim of the applicant should not be that of a busybody or vexatious, speculative or malafide. The relationship which the applicant claims with the deceased should not, on the face of it, be unbelievable. The claim of the applicant should not be that of a busybody or vexatious, speculative or malafide. The relationship which the applicant claims with the deceased should not, on the face of it, be unbelievable. If on that relationship a person could claim to be entitled to succession on intestacy or has sufficient interest in the estate of the deceased, otherwise, he should be allowed to contest the probate proceedings as a caveator. In this case, prima facie, it appears that Kalinath and Nabarun have a caveatable interest and should be allowed to participate in the probate proceedings. 10. On this footing the court disposes of this appeal by directing reopening of the probate proceedings. 11. Advocate-on-record for the executrix shall serve a copy of the application for grant of probate on advocates-on-record for Kalinath Sasmal and Nabarun Sasmal by 28th March 2024. 12. Both Kalinath Sasmal and Nabarun Sasmal are given liberty to file their respective affidavits in support of the caveat by 15th April 2024. Discovery and inspection may be completed by 30th April 2024. 13. Thereafter the learned judge taking testamentary matters may be requested to entertain, try and determine this application for grant of probate, as expeditiously as possible. 14. The impugned judgment and order dated 25th February 2021 is modified to the above extent. 15. The application (IA No: GA 3 of 2023) is allowed.