MANGALAMMA Vs. VEERABHADRAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this appeal challenging the order dated 22.02.2013 in P & S.C.No.67/2012 on the file of III Addl. District Judge, Tumkur. The appellants were not parties in the said proceedings. They claim to have been aggrieved by the impugned order and therefore this appeal by them. The necessary facts for disposal of this appeal are as follows:

(2.) The 1st respondent applied for issuance of probate in relation to a Will dated 26.07.1999 executed by one Malaveeraiah s/o Veerabhadraiah of Chikkahalli Village in respect of certain properties. This Malaveeraiah died on 09.06.2000. The 1st respondent applied for issuance of probate on 04.07.2012. The District Judge ordered for issuance of citation in Karnataka Gazettee and the same was published on 23.08.2012. The respondents 2 to 5 herein thus came on record in the probate proceedings, but they did not contest. After holding enquiry, the District Judge came to conclusion that execution of Will by Malaveeraiah stood proved by the evidence of PW-1 i.e., the petitioner and PW-2, one of the testators to the Will. Therefore the District Judge ordered for issuance of probate.

(3.) Assailing the findings of the probate court, the learned counsel for the appellants argues that the appellants are the daughters of the testator. They were not impleaded in the probate proceedings. They have a right to oppose the issuance of probate. The sons of the testator who came on record by impleading themselves, did not mention the names of the appellants in their application. They were purposefully left out. This shows collusion between the 1st respondent and the respondents no.2 to 5. This has resulted in the interest of the appellants being seriously prejudiced.