Smt. Rukmani Devi And Ors. vs Narendra Lal Gupta on 13 September, 1984
That being the position and in view of the nature of allegations made in
the plaint, we do not find any reason as to how the High Court as well as
the civil court could come to a conclusion that after the probate of the
Will executed by late S.Kirpal Singh was granted, the suit for declaration
for title and injunction on the above allegation could not be said to be
maintainable in law. The High Court also while holding that the suit was
not maintainable, in view of the probate granted of the Will of late
S.Kirpal Singh had relied on a decision of this Court, as noted herein
earlier, in the case of Rukmani Devi (supra). We are not in a position to
agree with the High Court that this decision could at all be applicable in
the facts and circumstances of the present case. A plain reading of this
decision would not show that after the grant of probate by a competent
court, the suit for title and permanent injunction cannot be said to be
maintainable in law. What this Court held in that decision is that once a
probate is granted by a competent court, it would become conclusive of the
validity of the Will itself, but, that cannot be decisive whether the
probate court would also decide the title of the testator in the suit
properties which, in our view, can only be decided by the civil court on
evidence. It is true that the probate of the Will granted by the competent
probate court would be admitted into evidence that may be taken into
consideration by the civil court while deciding the suit for title but
grant of probate cannot be decisive for declaration of title and injunction
whether at all the testator had any title to the suit properties or not.