GURMEET SINGH CHOPRA Vs. TARUNA CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner has assailed an order dated 25th November 2009 whereby the learned trial court refused the petitioner to lead additional evidence to prove the Will dated 18th September 1998. It is submitted by the petitioner that the petitioner was entitled to the estate of the deceased on the basis of the Will left behind by the deceased. The petitioner was impleaded as legal heirs on the basis of the Will and the petitioner, therefore, has a right to prove the Will. The learned trial court observed that Will could not be a subject matter of the suit filed by the deceased/ plaintiff in whose place defendant no.3 was brought on record as an LR. Therefore, no additional evidence to prove the Will can be allowed.

(2.) It is submitted by the petitioner that no probate of the Will was required, therefore, he could lead evidence to prove the Will before the Civil Court. He relied upon Santosh Kakkar & Ors. v. Ram Prasad & Ors., 1998 1 AD(Del) 938.

(3.) I consider that the contention of the petitioner is misconceived. The only court which has jurisdiction to adjudicate about the genuineness and validity of the Will is the Probate Court. The Probate Court has exclusive jurisdiction to decide about the Will and the Civil Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate about the genuineness of the Will. It is clear from the judgment of the Supreme Court in Binapani Kar Chowdhury v. Sri Satyabrata Basu & Anr., 2006 AIR(SC) 2263, wherein the Supreme Court observed as under: