Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Subodh Kumar Chakraborty (Dec.) vs Unknown on 17 February, 2026

OD- 35
                               ORDER SHEET

                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                  Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction
                            ORIGINAL SIDE

                               PLA/295/2012

                        IN THE GOODS OF :
                 SUBODH KUMAR CHAKRABORTY (DEC.)


BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY

Date:17th February, 2026 Appearance:

Mr. Jayanta Kumar Dhar, Adv.
Mr. Ramesh Chandra Paul, Adv.
...for the petitioner The Court: The original petitioner Sushil Kumar Chakraborty who had been the husband of the petitioner no. 1/applicant no. 1 and the father of the petitioner no. 2/applicant no. 2, in the instant application had applied for grant of probate with regard to the devolution of movable and immovable properties of Subodh Kumar Chakraborty who expired on 20th January, 2012 at his permanent residence at 27, Harodhole Lane, within the jurisdiction of Jorabagan Police Station, Calcutta - 700005. The instant petitioners/applicants had been the legal heirs and successors of the deceased Sushil Kumar Chakraborty being the original petitioner and on his demise were entitled to the benefits of the last Will and Testament dated 13th August, 2001, propounded by the testator Subodh Kumar Chakraborty, since deceased. The original petitioner, Sushil Kumar Chakraborty was the sole executor of the last Will and 2 Testament dated 13th August, 2001, executed by the testator, Subodh Kumar Chakraborty, since deceased. The present petitioners/applicants being the legal heirs and successors and representatives of the sole executor had been substituted subsequently.
The report of the department dated 18th November, 2025 revealed the instant PLA/295/2012 had been treated as non-contentious cause, Ad Valorem Court fees being adequately paid and no caveat certification being endorsed, the prayer (e) in PLA/295/2012 be granted. Letters of administration be, accordingly, granted in favour of the petitioners/applicants.
PLA/295/2012 is, accordingly, disposed of.
(ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.) DB