MIHIR RAMESH BHATT Vs. NA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal is filed under Sec. 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Challenge is to the order dtd. 22/8/2023 passed by the City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad, in Civil Misc. Application No.1039 of 2022. By the order so passed, the Court has been pleased to grant probate of the Will dtd. 1/6/2019 made by Ms.Gira Sarabhai who expired on 15/7/2021. However, the grant of probate certificate has been made subject to fulfillment and compliance of the requirement and condition of surety and bond as per para 256 of Civil Manual and under Sec. 291 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and as stipulated in the City Civil Court Rules, 1921. The order is challenged only to the extent that it requires submission of bond and surety.

(2.) Facts in brief are that it is the case of the applicants that Gira Sarabhai executed a Will and testamine on 1/6/2009 in the presence of witnesses and the said Will was notarized. The applicants/appellants before this Court are appointed as executors of her Will for effective implementation thereof. The application therefore was filed to get probate of the Will. On the application so made by the appellants and based on the evidence so produced in support of the application, after inviting objections and having noted that nobody had objected, the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, considering the material on record, allowed the application and directed that a probate certificate be issued in the joint name of the applicants/appellants herein. However, he further directed that the grant of probate shall be subject to fulfillment and compliance of condition of surety and bond as per para 256 of Civil Manual and under Sec. 291 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. On receipt of the order, the appellants filed an application Exh.15 to dispense with the requirement to submit surety. The Trial Court by an order below Exh.15 dtd. 6/9/2023 rejected the application on the ground that after pronouncement of the final order except for any correction relating to typographical mistake, no correction can be made and the application was therefore rejected.

(3.) Mr.Mihir Thakore learned Senior Advocate appearing with Ms.Delshad Kapadia learned advocate for the appellants made the following submissions: