MUKESH RAMCHANDRA BHARDWAJ Vs. USHA VASANTRAO KATHALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Samarth, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. Jibhkate, learned Counsel for the non-applicant-respondent.

(2.) CIVIL Revision Application is directed against the Order, dated 16th december, 2000, passed below Exh. 79 by Trial Court, whereby the application moved by the non-applicant-respondent under Order 22 of the Civil Procedure code came to be allowed and the respondent is allowed to contest Regular Civil suit No. 222 of 19992, as prayed.

(3.) MR. Samarth, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that the original plaintiff - Umabai widow of Mahadevrao Hirde filed Regular Civil Suit no. 222 of 1992 against the applicant and during the pendency of the suit, on 22nd October, 1996, Smt. Umabai expired. Mr. Samarth, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that it is the case of the non-applicant-respondent that umabai executed the alleged registered Will, dated 25th August, 1992 in favour of the non-applicant-respondent and as per the alleged Will, after the death of umabai, the respondent would become the legal heir. It is submitted that on the basis of the above referred Will, the respondent made an application (Exh. 79)under Order 22 of the Civil Procedure Code, which was allowed by the Trial court, though the respondent did not obtain a probate of the Will as required by sub-section (1) of section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 as well as as per the law laid down by this Court in the case of Babasaheb Yeshwant Anandrao patil vs. Smt. Manjulabai Balwant Gaikwad, 2001 (2) Mh. LJ. 945 = 2001 (2)ALL MR 574. Mr. Samarth, the learned Counsel for the applicant, therefore, submitted that the impugned Order is violative of the provisions of section 213 of the Indian Succession Act as well as the above referred law laid down by this court and, therefore, cannot be sustained in law.