OMPRAKASH DURGAPRASAD SHARMA Vs. MADHAV VASANT VELINKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. Ms. Rekha Shukla waives service of Rule on behalf of Respondents. Petition taken up for final hearing on Board.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Dani, Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Naik for Respondents at some length.

(3.) It is not disputed that the person by name Omprakash D. Sharma who is shown as Applicant in this Civil Revision Application who was the tenant of the suit flat. It is not disputed that Vasant S. Velinkar had 2/5 th undivided share in the ownership, and Manek Shrikrishna Velinkar had 3/5 th undivided share in the ownership. The said Manek Velinkar had a daughter by name Kamalini alias Leena. By executing her last Will dated 3 rd February, 1965 in which she had appointed her brother Vasant Velinkar and sister in law as executors she had bequeathed her 3/5 th undivided share in the suit flat to her daughter Kamalini alias Leena. On 16 th July, 1977, Kamalini, mother of Pramod and Pranali (who are Respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein) died intestate and thus she pre deceased Manek. As a result of this, first codicil dated 16 th October, 1978 was executed by Manek to amend Will dated 3 rd February, 1965. This Will and the codicil was duly produced in the proceeding and have been held to be proved. On 9 th December, 1979, Vasant died. It is the case of the Respondents that on 2 nd April, 1989, second codicil is executed and Lilavati V. Velinkar was also made executrix. This second codicil, however, is not part of the record. What is admitted is that Manek had died on 19 th April, 1980 and as a result of this, the property vested in her executors who were to act as Trustees of the two beneficiaries namely Pramod and Pranali.