Delhi District Court
Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma vs State on 30 January, 2014
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. PARAMJIT SINGH : ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
(WEST)02, TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI
Probate Case No. 94/10/08
Unique ID Case No. 02401C1412302008
1. Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma
S/o Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma
R/o D4, Vishwas Park,
Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi
2. Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma
S/o Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma
R/o D4, Vishwas Park,
Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi ....Petitioners
Vs.
1. State
2. Smt. Kusum Sharma
W/o Sh. P.K. Sharma
R/o H. No. 177, Sector11
LIG (Near Water Tank)
Awas Vikas Colony, Sikandara Road,
Agra, Uttar Pradesh
3. Sh. Anshumali Sharma
S/o Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma
R/o RZ52A, Subhash Park Ext.
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi.
PC No. 94/10/08 1/20
2
4. Smt. Suman Sharma
W/o Sh. R.P Sharma
R/o 46 Wing, Tech Flight
INSTT. FIT.
56APO
5. Smt. Shashi Bala Sharma
W/o Sh. Sunil Kumar Sharma
C/o Santosh Singh Chaudhary
2/135, Niranjan Puri (Mandir Wali Gali)
Ram Ghat Road, Aligarh,
Uttar Pradesh ....Respondents
Date of institution of the case 17.12.2008
Date on which, judgment have been reserved16.01.2014
Date of pronouncement of judgment30.01.2014
JUDGMENT:
The present petition u/s 278 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of Probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the Will dated 20.1.1999 executed by deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has been filed on behalf of the petitioners Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma and Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma.
2. Brief facts as made out from the petition are that deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma w/o late Sh. Cheeda Lal Sharma R/o D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi died on 13.03.2002, leaving behind her legal heirs i.e. petitioner nos. 1 & 2 and respondent nos. 2 to 5. It is further stated that Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma PC No. 94/10/08 2/20 3 ordinarily resided at D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. It is stated that deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma executed a Will dated 20.01.1999 which was duly registered with Sub Registrar, Delhi on 20.01.1999 vide registration no. 3720, Book No. III, Vol. No. 4462 at page 63 to 65. It is further stated that the petitioners are the legatee, executor named in the said Will dated 20.01.1999 and there is no impediment to the grant of Letter of Probate/Administration and it has been prayed that Probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the Will dated 20.01.1999 executed by deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma may be granted in favour of the petitioners.
3. Upon filing of the present petition, the notice of the same was issued to respondents and accordingly respondent nos. 3 to 5 entered their appearance and contested the present petition.
Citation for general public was also ordered to be got published in the newspaper 'Hindustan Times' and accordingly, the said citation was published in the newspaper 'Hindustan Times' on 10.4.2009.
It is pertinent to mention that the value of the property in question i.e. D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi has been assessed to the tune of Rs.44.14 lacs by the Executive Magistrate/Tehsildar, Patel Nagar, New Delhi.
4. Respondent no. 3 contested the present petition and filed the WS/ Objections, wherein it has been stated that the petitioners have not come with clean hands before the court and have concealed the true and material facts from the court PC No. 94/10/08 3/20 4 deliberately. It is further stated that the petitioners have no locus standi to file the present petition on the basis of the alleged Will dated 20.01.1999 and that the petitioners were not having any title to claim the probate of the Will dated 20.01.1999 in any manner as per the Will of the deceased. It is stated that as per para6, the above said Will dated 20.01.1999, the petitioners were not entitled for any relief from this court and from the bare reading of the said para, it was crystal clear that first of all the deceased Smt. Shanti Devi have bequeathed that after her death, the plot bearing no. D4 and D5, Vishwash Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi shall go and devolve upon her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma and she has also expressed her will that in case her husband died before her death, only then the said property would go and devolve upon the petitioners in the manner prescribed in para7 of the Will. It is further stated that Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma had died on 13.3.2002 and only then her husband Sh. ChhedaLal Sharma died on 02.06.2002 after three months of the death of Smt. Shanti Devi and as such as per para6 of the Will dated 20.01.1999, the said property bearing no. D5 and D4 had gone and devolved upon late Sh. Chheda Lal, who became the absolute and exclusive owner of the said properties after the death of Smt. Shanti Devi. It is also stated that the said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma had died intestate as such all the legal heirs including the petitioners and the respondent no.2 to 5 are entitled for 1/6th share in the said properties. All other averments made in the petition have also been denied on behalf of the respondent no.3 and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioners may be dismissed with cost.
PC No. 94/10/08 4/20 5
5. Replication/reply to the Objections of respondent no. 3 have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, wherein the averments made in the said WS/objections have been denied as incorrect and those made in the petition have been reiterated as correct.
6. Respondent no. 4 also contested the present petition and filed the WS/Objections, wherein it has been stated that the testatrix has no right to execute the Will and she never executed the said Will and signature as well as the thumb impression of the testatrix upon the same is forged. It is further stated that the value of the property is over Rs.20 lacs and the jurisdiction of trying the suit will be with the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. It is stated that deceased namely Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has no right to execute the Will and she never executed the present Will as she was only household lady and has purchased the property from the funds of her husband. It is further stated that deceased had no disposing mind and no understanding of any kind whatsoever and she had no memory and the alleged document/Will was false and fabricated. It is also stated that during her lifetime, the relations/family terms of the petitioners were not good with the mother and father of the respondents. Most of the other averments made in the petition have also been denied on behalf of the respondent no.4 and it has been prayed that the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioner may be dismissed with cost.
7. WS/objections have also been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 5 PC No. 94/10/08 5/20 6 and these objections are almost on the similar lines as that of respondent no.4.
8. Replication/reply to the Objections of respondent no. 4 & 5 have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, wherein the averments made in the said WS/ objections have been denied as incorrect and those made in the petition have been reiterated as correct.
9. It is pertinent to note here that the right of the respondent no.2 to file the objections had been closed vide order dated 15.10.2009 passed by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
10. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed on 02.02.2010 by one of the Ld. Predecessors of this court.
ISSUES :
1. Whether the Will dated 20.01.1999 executed by Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma is her last, genuine and valid Will, being executed in her sound disposing mind? OPP
2. Whether the petitioners have locus standi to file the present petition? OPR.
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of Probate/Letter of Administration on the basis of Will dated 20.01.1999,as prayed for? OPP.
4. Relief.PC No. 94/10/08 6/20 7
11. In support of their case, the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 have examined themselves as PW1& PW2 respectively. They have also examined PW3 Sh. Naresh Kumar, LDC SRII, Janak Puri, Delhi and PW4 Sh. Hira Balabh in support of their case.
12. In their RE, respondent no. 4 Smt. Suman Sharma, respondent no. 3 Sh. Anshumali Sharma and respondent no.5 Smt. Shashi Bala Sharma have examined themselves as RW1 to RW3 respectively.
13. I have heard the arguments at length put forward by Ld. Counsels for the petitioners and respondents and have carefully gone through the record of the case. I have carefully considered the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioners and respondents. I have also carefully perused the case law relied upon by the Ld. counsel for the petitioners and respondent no. 3.
14. The findings on the issues are as under : 15. Issue No. 1 The onus to prove this issue no.1 was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus, petitioner no.1 Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. P1), wherein he stated that his mother Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma wife of late Sh. Chheda PC No. 94/10/08 7/20 8 Lal Sharma has joined the heavenly abode at Delhi on 13.03.2002 and he has proved her death certificate as Ex. PW1/B. PW1 further deposed that his deceased mother has left behind her LRs i.e. petitioner nos. 1 & 2 and respondent nos. 2 to 5. PW1 deposed that deceased mother Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma had a fixed place of residence in India and her ordinary place of residence was at D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi where she was happily living with the petitioners before her death. PW1 further deposed that before her death, his mother executed her Will on 20.01.1999 in the presence of the witnesses which was registered with Sub Registrar, Janakpuri, Delhi on 20.01.1999 vide registration no. 3720, Book No. III, Vol. No. 4462 at page 63 to 65 by virtue of which she bequeathed her immovable property and he has proved the said Will dated 20.01.1999 as Ex. PW1/A. PW2 Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma has also filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. P2) and the contents of the said affidavit are almost on the similar lines as that of affidavit (Ex. P1) of PW1 Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma.
In support of their case qua the execution of the aforesaid Will dated 20.1.1999 ( Ex. PW1/A), the petitioners have also examined PW3 Sh. Naresh Kumar, LDC SRII, Janak Puri, Delhi and PW4 Sh. Hira Balabh, one of the attesting witnesses to the Will.
16. The present petition u/s 278 of Indian Succession Act for grant of probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the Will dated 20.1.1999 executed by deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein.
PC No. 94/10/08 8/20 9
In order to prove the above said Will dated 20.1.1999 (Ex. PW1/A) on record, the petitioners have examined PW 3 Sh. Naresh Kumar, LDC SRII, Janak Puri, Delhi & PW4 Sh. Hira Balabh, one of the attesting witness to the said Will.
PW3 Sh. Naresh Kumar, LDC SRII, Janak Puri, Delhi produced the summoned record i.e. Will executed by Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma w/o Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma which was registered on 20.01.1999 at Volume No. 4462 pasted at page 62 to 65 in Book No. III and he has proved the said Will already exhibited as Ex. PW1/A. PW4 Sh. Hira Balabh deposed that he knew late Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma w/o Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma, who was residing in his neighbourhood and he signed her Will as a witness and he was told by Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma that she was giving her assets to her children. PW4 further deposed that the Will Ex. PW1/A bears his signatures as an attesting witness at point A. PW4 also deposed that Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma and her husband were not having good health before their death and within one month of death of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma, her husband also died as he was not keeping good health.
The important fact is that both these witnesses i.e PW2 & PW3 have been cross examined on behalf of the respondent/objectors, however nothing material has come on record which could assail the credibility or trustworthiness of these witnesses.
Hence, in view of the above testimonies of PW2& PW3 it is evident PC No. 94/10/08 9/20 10 that Will dated 20.1.1999 (Ex. PW1/A) of the deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has been proved on record in accordance with law by the petitioners and they have also been able to prove on record that the said Will dated 20.1.1999 (Ex. PW1/A) was executed by Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma and that it was her last, genuine, valid and duly executed Will.
Thus, in view of the above discussion and observations, the issue no.1 is decided in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.
17. Issue Nos. 2&3 Issue Nos. 2 & 3 are being taken up together as both these issues are interconnected and have to be decided on the basis of same evidence.
The onus to prove these issues no. 2&3 was upon the petitioners and in order to discharge the said onus , the petitioner no.1 Sh. Sharat Chander Sharma has examined himself as PW1 and has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. P1), wherein he stated that his mother Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma wife of late Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma has joined the heavenly abode at Delhi on 13.03.2002 and he has proved her death certificate as Ex. PW1/B. PW1 further deposed that before her death, his mother executed her Will on 20.01.1999 in the presence of the witnesses which was registered with Sub Registrar, Janakpuri, Delhi on 20.01.1999 vide registration no. 3720, Book No. III, Vol. No. 4462 at page 63 to 65 by virtue of which she bequeathed her immovable property and he has proved the said Will dated 20.01.1999 as Ex. PW1/A. PW1 also deposed that Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma had bequeathed her immovable property bearing no. D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, PC No. 94/10/08 10/20 11 New Delhi to her legal heirs as described in the Will and he is seeking Probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the said immovable property and that there was no impediment for grant of the said Probate/Letter of Administration.
PW2 Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma has also filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. P2) and the contents thereof are almost on the similar lines as that of affidavit (Ex. P1) of PW1 Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma.
18. On the other hand, in their RE, the respondents have examined RW1 to RW3.
RW1 Smt. Suman Sharma has filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. RW1/A), wherein it has been stated that she is the daughter of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma and she wants her share out of the property bearing no. D4, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi left behind by her mother late Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma, who was a household lady. RW1 further deposed that her mother Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma had great love and affection towards her and in the same manner, she used to love her sons and her mother always used to tell that the property for which the dispute had arisen amongst the legal heirs, shall be shared in equal manner amongst sons and daughters. RW1 deposed that the said property was purchased by the funds of her grand father and her mother had no source of income and her father was a simply school teacher and the said property was ancestral property. RW1 further deposed that her mother was an old age lady and was missing her memory and the alleged Will is a fabricated one, which has been got PC No. 94/10/08 11/20 12 made by her brothers for their vested interests.
RW2 Sh. Anshulmali Sharma has filed his evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. RW2/A), wherein it has been stated that he was respondent no.3 in the present case and was the son of Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma, who died intestate on 02.06.2002. RW2 further deposed that Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma was his mother and she was the rightful and actual owner of the property bearing no. D4 and D5, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and she died on 13.03.2002. RW2 deposed that the petitioners have no locus standi to file the present petition and that the petitioners were not having any title to claim the probate of the Will dated 20.01.1999 in any manner as per Will of the deceased mother. RW2 further deposed that from the bare reading of Para6 & 7 of the Will, it was crystal clear that first of all the deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has bequeathed that after her death, the plot bearing no. D4 and D5, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi shall go and devolve to her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma and she has also expressed her will that in case her husband died before her death only then the said property would go and devolve to the petitioners. RW2 deposed that after death of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma, who died on 13.03.2002, her husband became the rightful and actual owner of the above said properties as per alleged Will of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma and Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma also died on 02.06.2002. RW2 further deposed that his father Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma had died intestate and as such all the legal heirs including petitioners and respondent nos. 2 to 5 are entitled for 1/6 th share in the above said properties. RW2 also deposed that the petitioners cannot claim any right or title by PC No. 94/10/08 12/20 13 virtue of the said Will as the said Will has already become operative after death of testator and the said property has devolved and gone to Late Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma, who died intestate and as such the petitioners have no title or legal right to seek Probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the said property in dispute by virtue of the above said Will.
RW3 Smt. Shashi Bala Sharma has also filed her evidence by way of affidavit (Ex. RW3/A) and the contents of the said affidavit are almost on the similar lines as that of affidavit (Ex. RW1/A) of RW1 Smt. Suman Sharma.
19. In the instant case, the petitioners are seeking probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the Will dated 20.1.1999 executed by deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma.
It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that vide her Will dated 20.1.1999, deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has bequeathed the properties mentioned therein in favour of her husband Sh Chheda Lal Sharma and she has also stated that in case said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma predeceased her , the said properties shall devolve upon her two sons namely Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma and Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma, who are the petitioners herein . It is further submitted that although above said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma has not predeceased the testatrix however, in view of the contents of the aforesaid Will dated 20..1.1999, the petitioners are still entitled to the properties mentioned therein as the deceased testatrix has specifically stated in her Will that she was not making any provisions PC No. 94/10/08 13/20 14 of shares in the above mentioned properties in favour of her daughters and one son Anshumali Sharma as she has spent lot of money on their education, marriage and other social and moral obligations and Sh. Anshumali Sharma had already been given builtup property on D5A Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi. It is submitted that while interpreting the contents of the Will, the intention of the testator is to be kept in mind and where a Will contain several clauses and the later clause is inconsistent with the earlier clause , in such a situation, the last intention of the testator should be given effect to on the basis of the later clause. It is also submitted that in view of the intention of the testatrix as reflected from the contents of her Will, the petitioners herein are entitled to the grant of Probate/Letter of Administration in respect of the above said Will dated 20.1.1999 executed by the deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma .
On the other hand, it has been submitted on behalf of the respondents that the petitioners have no locus standi to file the present petition as the deceased testatrix vide her Will dated 20.1.1999 has bequeathed that after her death the properties in question i.e plot bearing no. D4 and D5 Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi shall go and devolve upon her husband Sh.Chheda Lal Sharma and she has also expressed her Will that in case her husband died before her death, only then the said properties would go and devolve upon the petitioners in the manner prescribed in the said Will. It is further submitted that testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma had died on 13.3.2002 and her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma died after her death in June, 2002 and as such after the death of testatrix, the above said PC No. 94/10/08 14/20 15 properties have devolved upon Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma as per the contents of the Will and therefore the said Sh.Chheda Lal Sharma became the absolute and exclusive owner of the above mentioned properties after the death of testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma. It is also submitted that said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma had died intestate and as such all the legal heirs including the petitioners and respondent nos. 2 to 5 are entitled to 1/6th share in the said properties and therefore the petitioners are not entitled to the grant of probate/letter of administration as prayed for in this petition.
20. In the present case, the petitioners are seeking probate/letter of administration in respect of the Will dated 20.1.1999 ( Ex. PW1/A) executed by testatrix late Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma.
In the second para, on page no.2, of the aforesaid Will dated 20.01.1999 (Ex. PW1/A), it has been stated by the testatrix that :
"I hereby give to and bequeath in favour of my husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma above named the whole of my aforesaid house including the plot of land underneath bearing no. D4 & D5, Vishwas Park, New Delhi59. He shall and from the date of my death be deemed to be and become the sole and exclusive owner of the whole of the said property with the full and complete rights to live in and or sell the whole or any portion thereof on such terms and conditions and for such consideration as he may like and or otherwise deal with/dispose of the same in any manner or wise he may deem fit and to enjoy/retain all the sale proceeds, profits, benefits etc. If the said Executor predeceased me the said property shall PC No. 94/10/08 15/20 16 go and devolve to my sons namely (1) Sharat Chandra Sharma and Kumud Kumar Sharma in equal in the following manner :"
In view of the above, it is evident that by her aforesaid Will dated 20.1.1999, testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has bequeathed that after her death, the properties mentioned therein shall devolve upon her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma and in case said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma predeceased her , the said properties shall devolve upon her sons namely Sh. Sharat Chandra Sharma and Sh. Kumud Kumar Sharma ( petitioners herein).
In the present case, the contents of the abovesaid Will dated 20.1.1999 (Ex. PW1/A) are required to be interpreted and the concept of interpretation of Will/document has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case cited as 2013 (1) CLJ 703 SC.
In the aforesaid case titled as, "Mathai Samuel & Ors. Vs. Eapen Eapen (Dead) by LRs & Ors. ( cited as 2013 (1) CLJ 703 SC)", it has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :
"The primary rule of construction of a document is the intention of the executants, which must be found in the words used in the document. The question is not what may be supposed to have been intended, but what has been said. We need to carry on the exercise of construction or interpretation of the document only if the document is ambiguous, or its meaning is uncertain. If the language used in the document is unambiguous and the meaning is clear, evidently, that is what is meant by the executants of PC No. 94/10/08 16/20 17 documents. Contemporary events and circumstances surrounding the execution of the document are not relevant in such situations".
In the above said cited case, it has been further laid down that :
"Underhill and Strahan in Interpretation of Wills and Settlements (1900 Edn.), while construing a will held that the intention to be sought is the intention which is expressed in the instrument not the intention which the maker of the instrument may have had in his mind. We, therefore have to examine the composite character of exhibit A1 document and interpret the same in accordance with the normal and natural meaning which is discernible from that document. In order to ascertain the intention of the testator, the point for consideration is not what the testator meant but what that which he has written means".
"The words which are used in a document have to be understood in its normal and natural meaning with reference to the language employed. The words and phrases used in a document are to be given their ordinary meaning. When the document is made, the ordinary meaning has to be given to the document, which is relevant".
In the above cited case, it has also been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :
"Subsequent events or conduct of parties after the execution of the document shall not be taken into consideration in interpreting a document especially when there is no ambiguity in the language of the document. But we may refer to those events also only to reinforce the fact PC No. 94/10/08 17/20 18 that there is no ambiguity in the language employed in the document".
In view of the above, it is clear that the fundamental rule to interpret a document is the intention of the executant , which is to be ascertained from the words used in the document, while giving its ordinary meaning and the intention of the executant must be found in the words used in the document and the intention to be sought is the intention which is expressed in the instrument and not the intention which the maker of the instrument may have had in his mind. Further, in order to ascertain the intention of the testator, the point for consideration is not what the testator meant, but what he has written in the document.
In the instant case, vide her aforesaid Will dated 20.1.1999 ( Ex. PW1/A), testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has bequeathed that after her death, the properties mentioned therein shall devolve upon her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma and she has also specifically stated that he shall from the date of her death, be deemed to be and become the sole and exclusive owner of the said property with full and complete rights to live in and/or sell any portion thereof on such terms and conditions and for such consideration as he may like and/or otherwise deal with/dispose of the same in any manner or wise he may deem fit and to enjoy/retain all the sale proceeds, profits, benefits etc . In these circumstances, it is clear that testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma has not created any life interest in favour of her husband Sh.Chheda Lal Sharma and in fact, she has specifically stated in her above said Will that after her death, her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma shall become PC No. 94/10/08 18/20 19 the sole and exclusive owner of the properties mentioned therein and will have all the rights to deal with the said properties as he may like, after the death of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma.
It is pertinent to note here that the above said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma has expired after the death of testatrix, which implies that after the death of the testatrix, said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma became the sole and exclusive owner of the properties mentioned in the said Will. Further, from the material on record , it is evident that said Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma died intestate, which means that after his death, all his legal heirs i.e petitioners and respondent nos. 2 to 5 have become entitled to equal share in the said properties.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the case law cited as 2003 Legal Eagle (SC) 382, 1975 Legal Eagle (SC) 502, 1992 Legal Eagle (DHC) 524 and 1995 Legal Eagle (SC) 812, however, the said case law is not applicable in the instant case as the fact and circumstances of the present case are different from the fact and circumstances of the cases discussed therein and in my considered opinion, the aforesaid case law is not of any help to the petitioners in this case in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the above said case cited as 2013 (1) CLJ 703 SC.
Thus, in view of the above discussion & observations and having regard to the fact & circumstances of the present case and in view of the material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners are not entitled to the grant of Probate/Letter of Administration on the basis of the aforesaid Will dated PC No. 94/10/08 19/20 20 20.1.1999 of deceased Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma.
Hence, in view of the above, Issues Nos. 2 &3 are decided against the petitioners.
21. RELIEF In view of the above findings on the aforesaid issues no. 1 to 3, the present petition u/s 278 of Indian Succession Act for grant of Probate/Letter of Administration filed on behalf of the petitioners is hereby dismissed.
File be consigned to the record room.
(Announced in the open ) (Paramjit Singh)
(Court on 30.1.2014) ADJ02 (West)
Tis Hazari Courts Delhi
30.1.2014
PC No. 94/10/08 20/20
21
PC No. 94/10/08 21/20
22
PC No. 94/10/08 22/20