FEROZE HOMI DUGGAN Vs. JEAN N DUGGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been taken out for striking out the amendment which has been carried out pursuant to an order passed by the Appeal court on 24-6-2004 in Appeal No. 228 of 1997.

(2.) The sole ground on which the present application is made is that the amendment has been verified not by the petitioner himself but it has been verified by the constituted attorney of the petitioner and the constituted attorney is not entitled to verify the petition which has been filed by the petitioner because the grant which has been sought in the petition is not a limited grant but the full grant.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the defendant in support of the chamber summons has inter alia relied upon the provisions of section 241 of the indian Succession Act, 1925 and High Court (Original Side) Rules 379 and it has been contended that a constituted attorney can only apply for a limited grant. Once the present petition is converted for full grant by petitioner himself being joined as a party petitioner, the constituted attorney could not verify the petition chamber Summons No. 1278 of 2004 in Testamentary Suit No. 78 of 1994 in Testamentary Petition No. 156 of 1994 decided on 16-6-2005. (Bombay) and either the petitioner himself should reverify the petition or else the amendment by which the full grant is sought has to be struck out or rejected.