Friday, 24, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Hira Devi vs State And Ors.
2009 Latest Caselaw 3333 Del

Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 3333 Del
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2009

Delhi High Court
Hira Devi vs State And Ors. on 24 August, 2009
Author: S.Ravindra Bhat
*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                               TESTAMENTARY CASE NO. 83/ 2008

                                                          Reserved On 10.08.2009
                                                          Pronounced on : 24.08.2009



HIRA DEVI                                                    ... PETITIONER

                           Through : Mr. Ajay Mehrotra, Advocate


                                             Vs.

STATE AND ORS.                                               ... RESPONDENTS

Through : Nemo

CORAM

Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be Yes allowed to see the judgment.?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?            Yes

3.      Whether the judgment should be reported           Yes
        in the Digest?


Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat:

1. The petitioner seeks grant of probate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 concerning

the Will of Shri. C.D. Dharmani (hereafter "the testator"), who died in Delhi, on 2nd January,

1987.

2. It is averred that the testator died in New Delhi on 2.1.1987. He was married to the

petitioner, his widow who survived him. He left behind three sons, Ashok Dharmani, Suresh

Test Case 83/2008 Page 1 Dharmani and Bharat Bhushan Dharmani, and three married daughters, i.e. Dr.(Ms.) Mohini

Aswani, Ms. Roma Gandhi and Ms. Neelam Bhatia.

3. According to a registered Will dated 29th November, 1979, the testator bequeathed his

immovable property, i.e. 7/51 South Patel Nagar, New Delhi to his widow, the petitioner, for her

lifetime. After that, the said property was to devolve upon the testator's son Bharat Bhushan

Dharmani, to the exclusion of all others. The cash, and other movable property were bequeathed

to the testator's sons, in equal proportions.

4. It is stated that the testator was the absolute owner of all the properties, which are

subject matter of the registered will and for which bequests are made, and that he executed

the will when he was of sound disposing mind. The will was executed in the presence of two

witnesses, namely, Mr. K.K. Kalia, and Mr. Surjit Singh. The petitioner was named as Executor in

the will.

5. Notice of the petition was issued to all the legal heirs of testator. Citation was also

published in the newspapers. The legal heirs and representatives of the testators filed affidavits,

expressing that they do not object to the grant of the probate.

6. In order to prove the Will, the petitioner examined one of the attesting witnesses, Mr.

K.K. Kalia, who proved the will, as Ex. PW-1/1 in his statement, recorded on 15.01.2009. He

identified the original will and stated that the testator had executed it, at the point identified as

'A'; his signatures were identified at Point B, and the signatures of Shri Surjit Singh, were

identified at Point 'C'. He said that the signatures of the testator, as well as the other witness

were placed on the will in his presence. According to this attesting witness, no relative of the

testator was present, when he signed the will.

Test Case 83/2008 Page 2

7. The revenue authorities forwarded the valuation report of the immovable property.

According to the report, the value of the property is Rs. 46,31,782/-.

8. From the above discussion it is apparent that the Will made by late C.D. Dharmani by

which he bequeathed his properties, to the petitioner, has been duly proved through the testimony

of PW-1. The other relations of deceased have expressed no objection, through affidavits, to the

grant of probate, in these proceedings, to the petitioner, appointed by the testator as the sole

Executrix of the Will.

9. In view of the above, this court accepts the Will Ex. PW 1/1 executed by late Shri C.D.

Dharmani, and grants probate of the same to the petitioner in respect of the properties, described

in the will, of which particulars are set out fully in the petition, which are bequeathed subject to

her furnishing administration bond and surety bond. In case of insufficiency in court fees, as a

consequence of the valuation report, the petitioner shall make good the differential amount.

Subject to payment of such deficient court fee, the probate shall be issued.

10. The petition is allowed in the above terms.

24th August, 2009                                            (S. RAVINDRA BHAT)

                                                                     JUDGE




Test Case 83/2008                                                                            Page 3
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter