Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: probation of will in Chrome Leather Company Ltd vs Q.Dawson on 6 September, 2012Matching Fragments
4.The learned Senior Counsel cited Dr.R.A.Venkatesan v. D.Jenbagalakshmi [2012 [2] CTC 278 (D.B.)] and submited that even if a third party has a fraction of right, he will have locus standi and caveatable interest. The locus standi of a person having caveatable interest cannot be restricted to persons related by blood to the testator or beneficiary under the Will or a person having an interest in the estate of the deceased. Under certain circumstances, persons having interest in the property can either oppose the order probating the Will or seek revocation of the order probating the Will.
5. On the other hand, Mr.E.J.Ayyappan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would contend that since the application filed by 4th respondent and her children has been allowed, the order probating the Will has been revoked and nothing survives for the present appellant to seek further relief. There cannot be double orders cancelling the very same order probating the Will.
6. Mr.R.Saravanakumar, learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 9 in the facts and circumstances of the case naturally supported the appellant.
7. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions of the learned Senior counsel and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents, perused the materials placed on record and carefully gone through the impugned order of the learned single Judge.
8. A third party, namely, the present management of Chrome Leather Company Limited, has purchased the property. This property also has been included in the probated Will of late George Joseph Chambers. Let us see the law first.
9. In Sadananda Pyme v. Harinam Sha [AIR 1950 Cal. 179], a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court held that a person holding an interest in the property in the event of intestacy is one, who will have locus standi to file an application under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act,1925 to cancel the Order probating the Will.
19. The appellant acquired the property, exactly, Chrome Leather Company Limited in the auction purchase. This property is also included in the Will of late George Joseph Chambers. That Will has been probated at the instance of the probate petitioner Q.Dawson, the 1st respondent herein. The Court has the duty to see what exactly the property available. For instance, if a property included in the Will has already been disposed of, the buyer of the property, even the person who lent money on the property, a mortgager will have right to oppose probating the Will and also seek revocation of the order probating the Will.