H S HALASWAMY Vs. KUMARI ASHA HALASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) this original side appeal is by the defendant directed against the order dated 20th/21st/25th march, 1986 of the learned probate judge of this court in t.o.s. No. 1/1983 or the file of this court.

(2.) the facts leading to this appeal may be stated briefly and they are as follows. Respondent-Smt. Asha halaswamy is the first of the two daughters of the appellant Dr. H.s. halaswamy. She present a civil petition praying for grant of letters of administration to the estate of her grandfather late h. Siddavcerappa limited to the immovable properly namely, his residence situated in jayanagar fully described in the affidavit of schedule to the petition founding her claim for letters on the last will and testament said to have been executed by the said siddavcerappa on 10-12-1978. That siddaveerappa died on 28-4-1981 is not in dispute. The probate civil petition No. 9/1983 was presented in this court under part vii and ix of the Indian succession Act, 1925, praying that this court may be pleased to allow the petitioner to prove the will in common form and to grant to the plaintiff letters of administration with a copy of the will to have effect throughout the union of india. The petition was admitted on 22-4-1983 and citation was directed to be taken out in one issue of deccan herald, Bangalore. The appellant entered appearance and entered caveat resisting the grant of letters inter alia on ihe ground that the will propounded by the plaintiff, his daughter could not be acted upon inassuch as the same was not the last will and testament of his father late h. Siddavcerappa. He propounded another will dated 20-12-1980 said to have been executed by his father under which he was the sole legatee and as such the plaintiff, his daughter, was not entitled to the letters. He even alleged that the will propounded by his daughter was a fraudulent one and she must be put to strict proof of the due execution of that will. It was in the light of the objections in the caveat entered that this court directed the probate civil petition No. 9/1983 to be converted into a testamentary original suit in accordance with the rules of this court treating the pleadings as plaint and written statement.

(3.) as rightly observed by the learned probate judge who granted the letters in favour of the plaintiff that several inter locutory orders came to be passed both during the pendency of the testamentary original suit as well as during the pendency of this appeal in this court, it is unnecessary to make a detailed reference to all of them, though to some of them we will advert to at the appropriate stage in the light of the issues to be decided.