Delhi High Court
Mahamandleshwar Swami Punyanand vs State on 18 July, 2011
Author: Manmohan Singh
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Probate Petition No. 12/2010
% Judgment delivered on: 18.07.2011
+ Mahamandleshwar Swami Punyanand .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mahendra Rana, Advocate.
Versus
State ....Respondent
Through: Ms Bandana Shukla, Adv. proxy
for Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani, Adv.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest ?
MANMOHAN SINGH, J
1. The present petition under section 222 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925 has been filed by the petitioner seeking grant
of Probate of the will dated 01.08.1992 of Swami Maheshanand Giri
(hereinafter referred to as the deceased) who died on 16.10.2008 at
Delhi.
2. The deceased, was the disciple of Late Mahandleshwar
Swami Narsingh Giri ji Maharaj of Dakshinmurti. The original death
Probate Case No. 12/2010 Page 1 of 5
certificate of the deceased as well as the citation, both are on record.
At the time of his death, the deceased had fixed place of abode as
Sanyas Ashram, 11, Bela Road, Shri Ram Road, Civil Lines, Delhi-
110054. The petitioner who has been appointed as an executor under
the will dated 01.08.1992, Ex.PW1/1, hence, he is seeking probate of
the will dated 01.08.1992.
3. As per Schedule A and Annexure -C of the petition, at the
time of his death, the deceased was in possession of following
moveable assets :
(i) Bank Account Amount worth Rs.5038267.00
(ii) Shares worth Rs.2994451.6
(iii) Mutual Funds Investments worth Rs.5221853.3
(iv) LIC worth Rs.100,000
------------------------
Total: Rs.1,33,54,573.9
----------------------
4. As per the petitioner, value of the petition for the purposes
of Court Fee at the time of institution is affixed and the requisite Court
Fee has been paid on the petition.
5. No reply was filed by the respondent to the present
petition. Further, it appears from the order dated 03.02.2011 that
Probate Case No. 12/2010 Page 2 of 5
Learned counsel for the respondent did not even lead any evidence on
behalf of the respondent State.
6. The certified copy of valuation report dated 04.08.2010 of
the moveables left behind by the testator filed vide list of documents
dated 13.08.2010 is not challenged. The citation was filed on
20.10.2010.
7. On 03.02.2011, PW-I Swami Mitgranand Giri tendered
evidence by way of affidavit dated 02.02.2011 in examination in
chief. The affidavit was marked as Ex. PW-1/A along with Will Ex.
PW-1/1 bearing his signatures at point 'A' in the Will. On
03.02.2011, the State cross examined the PW-1.
8. Similarly, PW-2 Swami Attma Chetanya tendered evidence
by way of affidavit dated 02.02.2011 in examination in chief. The
affidavit was marked as Ex. PW-2/A alongwith Will Ex. PW-1/1
bearing his signatures at point 'A' in the Will.
9. Despite the last opportunity granted to the State for filing
reply vide order dated 30.11.2010 the reply to the Probate petition was
not filed.
Probate Case No. 12/2010 Page 3 of 5
10. In the case of Madhukar D. Shande Vs. Tara Bai Aba
Shebagae; JT 2002 (1) SC 74, the court held that if there is nothing
unnatural about the transaction and the evidence adduced satisfies the
requirement of proving a will, the court would not return a finding of
'not proved' merely on account of certain assumed suspicion or
supposition.
11. As regards filing of administration bond under Section 291
of Indian Succession Act, 1925, it is stated by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner being sole beneficiary need not
furnish any bond under Section 291 of Indian Succession Act, 1925.
12. The will dated 01.08.1992, Ex.PW1/1, has been signed by
the deceased and by three witnesses, but, since attesting witness No.1
Swami Ish Giri has passed away, the petitioner has filed the evidence
by way of affidavits of PW-1 Swami Mitranand Giri and PW-2 Swami
Atmanand Giri, the other two attesting witnesses of the will dated
01.08.1992, Ex.PW1/1, of the deceased. The affidavit of the petitioner
has been filed on 01.07.2011 confirming the averments made in the
petition. The statements of both, the attesting witness, namely PW-1
Swami Ish Giri and PW-2 Swami Atmanand Giri have been recorded
Probate Case No. 12/2010 Page 4 of 5
wherein both of them have deposed that they were present at the time
when the deceased had executed his will Ex.PW1/1, and it is the last
and original will of the deceased. The will, Ex.PW1/1 is duly proved.
13. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances,
this petition is allowed and the probate as prayed for in respect of the
will dated 01.08.1992, Ex.PW1/1, is granted.
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
JULY 18, 2011
