BETTY SURESH MAHINDRA Vs. MARTHAND SINGH MAHINDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have tiled this Application under Section 247 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for appointment of an Administrator pending disposal of the main proceedings touching the validity of the Will and six Codicils of the deceased Suresh C. Mahindra for grant of Letters of Administration of the Will and six Codicils annexed with, such Administrator being delegated with all the power and rights of general administration other than the rights of distributing such assets of the deceased subject to the immediate and absolute control of this Court.

(2.) In support of the application 1st petitioner has filed an affidavit where in shehas averred that she together with and on behalf of her two minor children have filed a petition for grant of Letters of Administration with the Will and six Codicils. The estate oflate Suresh C. Mahindra is very large and of considerable value and the bulk of it is in the State of Karnataka, but lesser and somewhat more considerable assets in the estate arc situated in the State of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra.

(3.) It is averred that the 1st respondent has contended against the Will and six Codicils as being bogus. He arrogated himself as the authority on the ground that he being the eldest son of the deceased Suresh C. Mahindra seeking the estate to be divided in accordance with Hindu Law of Succession as on intestacy. 3.1. It is further averred that the 1st respondent, on the ill-advise, is interferning with the properties of the deceased. He has also attempted to make forcible entry into properties to make unlawful gain by taking away the moveables and documents of business affairs without any reference to or in consultation with those entitled under the Will and six Codicils. 3.2. Further, it is averred that the 1st respondent is trying to dispose of the properties and even worse he has sought to handle the business affairs of the deceased, in respect of which he has not acquired knowledge and experience. 3.3. It is also averred that there are 169 Horses of considerable value which would otherwise, in the hands of the 1st respondent, be liable to incalculable loss, in addition to that already caused, depriving the 1st petitioner and her children of their legitimate entitlements. 3.4. It is further stated that the deceased has left behind very large racing establishment comprising large number of horses of which about 52 valuable horses of the deceased and some are best known of race horses of imported breed and heritage are included in the stable; the majority of which are with Mr. Rashid Byramji, a reputed Race Horse Trainer, who is second to none in the profession and has to his credit that no other similar professional can compare and best trainer in the Country. Mr. Rashid Byramji was an intimate friend of late Suresh C. Mahindra, confidante and Adviser to him in all matters concerning his affairs and the establishment which is known as the business of "Broad-acres Stud Farm." 3.5. It is stated that after the death of late Sri Suresh C. Mahindra, due to interference by the 1st respondent, all the properties and affairs of the deceased are in disarray. In fact, it is averred that due to illegal assumption of authority by the 1st respondent considerable loss and damage is caused to the estate and therefore the 1st petitioner requests that Mr. Rashid Byramji or any other professional man be appointed as Administrator pendente lite.