V MURALIDHARAN Vs. R RAGHAVENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P. No. 689 of 1991 in whose favour, a probate was granted in the said Original Petition on 25-2-1992. The respondent herein filed Application No. 3534 of 1993 for revocation of the said probate and the Application has been allowed by the learned single judge by order dated 27-9-1993. THIS Appeal is against the said order.

(2.) THE main contention urged by learned counsel for the appellant is that the respondent does not have any cavetable interest as he is claiming only under a will which is not probated. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant that no person can claim in a court of law that he is a legatee or an executor unless the Will is probated, where the Will requires probate by virtue of the provisions of the Indian Succession Act. THE respondent is claiming under a Will dated 9-4-1989 said to have been executed by A.K. Ranganatha Rao, brother of the respondent's paternal grand mother Sakkubai. On the other hand, the said Sakkubai is the maternal grandmother of the appellant. THE appellant also claims that he is an adopted son of the said Ranganatha Rao, who died on 7-10-91. According to the appellant, the said Ranganatha Rao left a Will dated 9-5-1991 which was a registered one.

(3.) BUT, without disclosing either the pendency of the suit in O.S. No. 246 of 1992 or the claim made by the respondent in the said suit, the appellant obtained an order for probate on 25.2.92 in the Original Petition. A petition for revocation of the said probate was filed in. Application No. 281 of 1993 by the father of the respondent. That petition was dismissed on 22-7-93. The respondent had filed Application No. 3534 of 1993 on 5-7-93 for revocation of the probate. That application was ordered on 27-9-93 as stated by us earlier.