ASHOK BHOJWANI Vs. ESTATE OF MIRA BHOJWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge disposing of an application under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act (hereinafter to be called the Act) for grant of a Probate.

(2.) One Mrs. Mira Bhojwani died at Delhi on 11.5.1979. She had executed a Will dated 8.3.1978 by which she had appointed her only two children (sons) Ashok Bhojwani and Subhas Bhojwani as the executors of her Will. Amongst the properties bequeathed by her was one bunglow at 7, Nizamuddin East, which she bequeathed in equal shares to her daughters in law, Kusum, also known as Sonu, wife of her son Ashok and Mira, wife of her other son Subhash. She also bequeathed certain other plot and cash to her sons and grand children. Notice was issued to the husband of the deceased. No objection was raised and the learned Judge has directed the issue of Probale with will annexed in favour of the appellants. He however, directed that they must furnish and Administration Bond in the sum of Rs. l,00,000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Registrar. The learned Judge noticed that the appellant had placed the valuation of the estate at the amount of Rs. 2,72,707.00 and had paid court fee on that. The learned Judge, however, took the view that three items namely-

(3.) Section 19(1) of Court Fees Act 1870 (to be called the Act) provides that no order entitling the petitioner to grant of probate shall be made until the petitioner has filed in the court a valuation of the property in the form set out in the third schedule and the court is satisfied that the fee mentioned at No. 1I of the first schedule has b Jen paid on such valuation. As required by Schedule III appellant filed an affidavit and alongwith it gave valuation of the assets in the form required by annexure 'A' to third schedule. Annexure B to the third schedule permits a schedule of debts and other deductions to be mentioned; the valuation of the assets in Annexure 'A' is arrived at by deducting the amounts shown in annexure 'B' not subject to duty. The learned Judge has taken the view that entries in f, g & h mentioned above could not fall within the ambit of annexure 'B' as they cannot be said to be an amount of debts due and owing from the deceased payable by law out of the estate and, therefore, the total of these items should be added to the valuation given and requiring the appellant to pay additional court fee.