Delhi District Court
Dinesh Gupta vs State on 4 September, 2019
IN THE COURT OF SH. LAXMI KANT GAUR, ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE, CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
PC No. 40 of 2018
1. DINESH GUPTA
S/o Late Sh. J.V. Gupta,
R/o 2, B.D. Estate,
Timarpur,
Delhi110054.
2. NITIN GUPTA
S/o Late Sh. Suresh Gupta
R/o 62, B.D. Estate,
Timarpur, Delhi110054. .......PETITIONERS
Versus
1. STATE
2. MANJULA GUPTA
W/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta
R/o 62, B.D. Estate,
Timarpur, Delhi110054.
3. ASHISH GUPTA
S/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta
R/o 62, B.D. Estate,
Timarpur, Delhi110054.
4. SHRUTI MITTAL
D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta
R/o C401, The Vilas, Akashneem Marg,
DLF Phase2, Sector 25, Gurgaon,
Haryana122002.
PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 1 of 11
5. RITU GUPTA
D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta
R/o 413, 2nd Main, 4th Cross,
3rd Block, HRBR Layout,
Behind BTS Depot No.10, Bangalore,
Karnatka, 560084.
6. NEENA GUPTA
W/o Ashish Gupta
R/o 62, B.D. Estate,
Timarpur, Delhi110054. ......RESPONDENTS
Date of filing of the petition : 25.07.2018
Date of reserving judgment : 14.08.2019
Date of judgment : 04.09.2019
PETITION U/S 276 & 264 R/W PART IX OF INDIAN SUCCESSION
ACT, 1925 FOR GRANT OF PROBATE IN RESPECT OF WILL
DATED 15.08.2016 OF LATE SHRI PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
Judgment
1. By this judgment I propose to decide the petition filed under Section
276 of the Indian Succession Act for the grant of probate in respect of
the Will dated 15.8.2016 executed by late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta
by the petitioners Sh. Dinesh Chand Gupta, son of late Sh. J.V. Gupta
and Sh. Nitin Gupta, Son of late Sh. Suresh Gupta, executors of the
Will.
PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 2 of 11
Facts
2. According to the petition filed, late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, had executed a Will dated 15.08.2016 bequeathing all his properties in favour of his sons and daughters in the manner as follows: (A) To, Respondent No. 2, Ms. Manjula Gupta, W/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, the following:
(i) All jewellery and any cash in hand.
(ii) Loan to Gaurang Modi, S/o Sandeep Modi
Rs.14,00,000/.
(iii) Joint shares in Mangalore Refinery (200Nos.)
(iv) Loan to Manjula Gupta.
(B) To, Respondent No. 3, Mr. Ashish Gupta, S/o Late Sh.
Prakash Chandra Gupta, the following:
(i) Capital in the firm Siyaram Bros.
(ii) Shares of and Current Deposits in own companies i.e.
Siyaram Sons Pvt. Ltd., Siyaram Bros. (Auto) Pvt. Ltd. And Siyaram Bros (Raj.) Pvt. Ltd.
(iii) Loan to Ashish Gupta.
(iv) Balance in joint ICICI Bank a/c 662601541440.
(v) Balance in Canara Bank a/c 4455.
(vi) Any assets remaining, undefined, refunds/liabilities current
or arising in future from any civil/criminal suits or from any sales tax, income tax, VAT or GST assessment. PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 3 of 11 (C) To, Respondent No. 4, Ms. Shruti Mittal, D/o Late Sh.
Prakash Chandra Gupta, the following:
(i) Loan (liability) from Shruti Gupta.
(ii) FDR with UCO Bank given as security in 138 case.
(iii) Loan to Mr. Vinay Kumar MittalRs.5,50,000/
(iv) Balance in joint ICICI Bank a/c. 629201501822. (D) To, Respondent No. 5, Ms. Ritu Gupta, D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, the following:
(i) Shares Tata Motors 224 Nos (of Face Value Rs.10/) or such amount as per split in shares.
(E) To, Respondent No. 6, Ms. Neena Gupta, daughterinlaw of late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, the following:
(i) Capital in firm Patraani.
(ii) Any share investment besides the above mentioned.
3. Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta had passed away on 04.11.2017.
Thereafter, the petitioners i.e. executors of the Will had filed the present petition on 26.07.2018.
Publication U/s. 283 of the Indian Succession Act and Service on Respondents
4. After the petition had been filed there was a direction given for the PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 4 of 11 publication of citation as is required under Section 283 of the Indian Succession Act in the newspapers i.e. 'Indian Express', 'Veer Arjun' and 'The Hindu'. There was also a direction given for the citation to be displayed at some prominent place in the Office of the District Collector/Concerned SDM and on the notice board of the Court.
5. Notice was also directed to be sent to the respondents in this case. They had been served with the process of the Court and one Sh. Raunak Jain had appeared in the Court on their behalf.
No Objection by the Respondents to the Grant of Probate in favour of the Petitioners
6. All the respondents in this case, mainly Manjula Gupta, D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, Ashish Gupta, S/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, Shruti Mittal, D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, Ritu Gupta, D/o Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, and Neena Gupta, W/o Sh. Ashish Gupta had filed their affidavits and also their statements had been recorded in the Court. All of them have stated that they had no objection to the probate being granted in favour of the petitioners for the execution of the Will executed by their father late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta.
PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 5 of 11 Proving of Will
7. Both the petitioners in this case are also the attesting witnesses of the Will. Their testimonies were recorded in the Court. Both of them had identified their signatures on the Will and also that of the testator late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta.
8. The relevant part of the testimony of the witness PW1 Sh. Nitin Gupta reads as under: "Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta was brother of my grand father. He had executed a Will on 15.08.2016 in my presence and in the presence of other attesting witnesses namely Sh. Dinesh Gupta. The Will had been signed by Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta in our presence and we had signed the Will in his presence. At the time of when he had executing the Will, he was hail and hearty and he was in full senses. He had executed this Will without any pressure from anyone of his own will and accord.
The original Will has been filed alongwith the petition and I can identify the same.
(At this stage, the Will is shown to the witness). It is the same Will which was executed by late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta in my presence and the presence of the other witness Sh. Dinesh Gupta. It bears the signatures of late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta, that of Sh. Dinesh Gupta and my signatures at points A, B and C respectively. (The Will is now Ex.PW1/1)."
PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 6 of 11
9. Similarly, the testimony of the other attesting witness Sh. Dinesh Gupta reads as under: "My uncle Sh. Prakash Chand Gupta had executed a Will dated 15.08.2016. He had distributed his assets to his family members by the said Will.
Before executing the Will, he had called me on one of the days and discussed with me issue relating to the distribution of his assets. I had given my opinion that it would be a fair thing to do. He had given me a telephone call in the morning on 15.08.2016 and had called me over to his residence. After I had reached, Sh. Nitin Gupta had also arrived. He already had the Will which he wanted to execute typed. He had signed the Will in my presence and in the presence of Sh. Nitin Gupta, his grant son and my nephew. Thereafter, we had signed the Will in their presence. He was in perfectly in good health at the time he had executed the Will.
(At this stage, Will Ex. PW1/1 is shown to the witness) The Will bears my signatures at point B. The Will also bears the signatures of my Uncle Sh. Prakash Chand Gupta and my nephew Sh. Nitin Gupta at point A and C.
10. After reading their testimonies there is no manner of doubt that the testator late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta was in good health when he had executed the Will. He had signed the Will in the presence of the PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 7 of 11 attesting witnesses and the attesting witnesses had signed the Will in his presence.
11. It can, therefore, be said that the Will dated 15.08.2016 Ex.PW1/1 stands proved in terms of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act. Probate does not confer title to the property of Deceased
12. A Testamentary court is only concerned with finding out whether or not the testator executed the testamentary instrument of his free will. It is settled law that the grant of a Probate or Letters of Administration does not confer title to property. They merely enable administration of the estate of the deceased1. It may therefore be understood by the parties clearly that this Judgment does not confer any title on the Petitioner nor in respect of the Property.
No need to file Administrative Bond or Sureties
13. Since in this case, it is the probate which is to be granted in favour of the petitioners, namely, Dinesh Gupta and Nitin Gupta, executors of the 1 Delhi Development Authority vs Mrs. Vijaya C. Gurshaney & Anr on 26 August, 2003 - [ (2003)7 SCC 301] PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 8 of 11 Will, there will not be any necessity of furnishing any Administrative Bond or Surety Bond in terms of Section 291 of the Indian Succession Act which lays down that such bonds and sureties are required only in case of Letters of Administration being granted and not Probates. Compliances to be made under section 317 of Indian Succession Act.
14. Petitioners herein would be required to exhibit inventories within six months and one year as is required u/s 317 of the Indian Succession Act from the date of the issue of the Letters of Administration in the Form No.178 and 179 Vol. 6, Delhi High Court Rules respectively. Valuation under Section 19 -I of the Court Fees Act
15. It may be noted here though the Petitioners Sh. Dinesh Gupta and Sh. Nitin Gupta may be held to be entitled for the Probate being the executor of the Will, the same shall, however, be issued only after Petitioners have filed the valuation of the properties which are the subject matter of the Will in the Form as given in Schedule III of the Court Fees and accepted by the Court as is required under section 19I 2 2 [19-I. Payment of Court-fees in respect of probates and letters of administration.--
(1) No order entitling the petitioner to the grant of probate or letters of administration shall be made upon an application for such grant until the petitioner has filed in the Court a valuation of the property in the form set forth in the Third Schedule, and the Court is satisfied that the fee mentioned in No. 11 of the First Schedule has been paid on such valuation.1[19-I. Payment of Court-fees in respect of probates and letters of administration.--(1) No order entitling the petitioner to the grant of probate or letters of administration shall be made upon an application for such grant until the PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 9 of 11 of the Court Fees of the Act and in consequence thereof necessary Court Fee has been filed. One may also make reference to the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in DRA Mountford v. Govt of NCT of Delhi 2018 SCC OnLine Del 8892 in this respect. Relevant part of the Judgment reads as under:
"19. Considering the law cited above the question of valuation of assets and payment of the court fee shall arise only once the Will is held to be valid and the Court directs the grant of probate or letter of administration with Will annexed and the final valuation shall be done by the Collector of the area at that time."
Conclusion
16. In view of the foregoing discussion and facts and circumstances of the case, I am granting Probate in favour of the Petitioners, namely, Sh. Dinesh Gupta and Sh. Nitin Gupta u/s 276 of the Indian Succession Act in respect of the entire estate of the Testator Late Sh. Prakash Chandra Gupta as referred to in the Will. Let the same be issued in favour of the petitioners, namely, Sh. Dinesh Gupta and Sh. Nitin Gupta on the petitioner has filed in the Court a valuation of the property in the form set forth in the Third Schedule, and the Court is satisfied that the fee mentioned in No. 11 of the First Schedule has been paid on such valuation." (2) The grant of probate or letters of administration shall not be delayed by reason of any motion made by the Collector under section 19H, sub-section (4).] PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 10 of 11 submission of the valuation of the properties/estate as referred to in the Will in the Form as given in Schedule III of the Court Fees and accepted by the Court as is required under section 19I of the Court Fees of the Act and in consequence thereof necessary Court Fee has been filed. He would also be required to exhibit inventories and accounts within six months and one year as discussed above under section 317 of the Indian Succession Act.
17.Ordered accordingly.
18.File be consigned to record room.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court on 04th September,2019 (LAXMI KANT GAUR) Additional District Judge(05), Central District, Delhi.
PC No. 40/18 Dinesh Gupta & Anr. vs. State & ors. page 11 of 11