Delhi High Court
Neelam Anand vs State & Ors on 1 March, 2012
Author: A. K. Pathak
$~A-20
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TEST.CAS. 99/2010
Decided on: 1st March, 2012
NEELAM ANAND ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Kartike Anand, Adv.
Versus
STATE & ORS ..... Respondent
Through R-1 and R-2 are ex parte
Mr.Vikas Tiwari, Adv. for R-
3 and R-5
Coram:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
A.K. PATHAK, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of this Petition under section 278 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925, the petitioner seeks Grant of Letters of
Administration in respect of the Will dated 28.07.2006 left behind
by late Smt.Sheila Anand (hereinafter referred to as the "testatrix").
2. Petitioner is the daughter in-law (son‟s wife) of testatrix.
Respondents Nos. 2, 4, and 5 are the daughters of testatrix; whereas
respondent no.3 is the son of testatrix.
3. As per the Petition, the testatrix died on 12.06.2010 leaving
behind respondents No.2 to 5 as her legal heirs. The husband of
testatrix Mr.Chaman Lal Anand had pre-deceased her as he passed
away on 09.06.1996. Testatrix executed her last Will and Testament
dated 28.7.2006, whereby she bequeathed her Estate in the manner
as indicated in the Will. Testatrix had executed the Will her full
and complete disposing power, sound mind and without any
influence or coercion from any quarter or person, whatsoever.
Testatrix had signed and executed her Will in the presence of two
attesting witnesses, namely, Mr.Suhail Dutt and Mr.Kewal Krishan
Sharma. The testatrix was a permanent resident of Delhi, inasmuch
as, the immoveable properties bequeathed by way of the Will in
question are situated in Delhi. Petitioner has not filed any similar
petition before the District Judge or any other Court.
4. After the service of notice respondents Nos. 3 and 5, have
filed their respective written statement wherein they have admitted
the claim of the petitioner, as set-out in the petition. Respondent
Nos. 3 and 5 have categorically stated in their Counter-Affidavit
that they have no objection to the grant of Letters of Administration
to the Will of the testatrix. As regards respondent Nos. 2 and 4 are
concerned, their Counsel had appeared in Court on 18.3.2011.
However, no reply has been filed by them, inasmuch as, they
stopped appearing in Court and respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 were
proceeded ex parte on 21.11.2011.
5. Citation has been published in the newspapers „The
Statesman‟ (English edition) dated 04.02.2012 and in „Amar Ujala‟
Hindi edition dated 03.02.2012, for information to the general
public and also for notifying objections, if any, to the grant of
Probate and Letters of Administration. No one has filed any
objection passing the grant of Letters of Administration to the
petitioner.
6. Valuation Reports have been received in respect of the
properties involved in the Will.
7. The petitioner has led evidence. Affidavits of evidence have
been filed by the attesting witnesses. Mr.Suhail Dutt in his affidavit
has deposed that Ex.P1 is the last Will and testament of late Smt.
Sheila Anand. Testatrix had affixed her mark at point „A‟ on Ex.P1
in his presence of her own free Will and at the time of affixing her
mark on the Will the testatrix was of sound disposing state of mind.
She fully understood the nature and effect of her dispositions, that
she was executing her Will and testament to bequeath her legacy.
The testatrix had affixed her mark in his presence and in the
presence of other attesting witness Mr.Kewal Krishan Sharma. He
as well as the other attesting witness Mr. Kewal Krishan Sharma
had affixed their respective signatures in presence of each other.
He has identified his signatures on the Will Ex. P-1 at point „B‟ and
that of Mr. Kewal Krishan Sharma at point „C‟. Mr. Kewal Krishan
Sharma, the other attesting witness to the Will, has also deposed in
line with Mr. Suhail Dutt. From their testimony, in my view,
petitioner has succeeded in proving that the deceased had executed
the Will dated 28.7.2006 in their presence and at that time she was
in sound disposing state of mind. From the testimony of this
witness Will has been duly proved. Accordingly, I do not find any
impediment in granting Letters of Administration to the petitioner
in respect of the Will of testatrix.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, Letters of Administration is
granted to the petitioner in respect of the Will dated 28.07.2006
subject to her paying requisite Court Fee and furnishing
Administrative Bond with one surety to the satisfaction of the
Registrar General of this Court.
9. Petition is disposed of.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
MARCH 01, 2012
nt
