LAWS(BOM)-2016-10-28

PANNA SURENDRA MEHTA Vs. PURNIMA LATIK SHAH

Decided On October 14, 2016
Panna Surendra Mehta Appellant
V/S
Purnima Latik Shah Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jaswantbhai Natwarlal Jolia ("Jaswantbhai") died on 26th January 2004.Ex. "A" in evidence, Vol. D, p. 224. He left a Will dated 10th August 2002.Copy at Ex. "B" in evidence, Vol. D, pp. 225-226. Original deposited in Court. The Plaintiff, Panna S. Mehta ("Pannaben"), seeks Letters of Administration with Will Annexed to this Will. She is Jaswantbhai's sister-in-law, his wife Veenaben's sister. Panna is one of the beneficiaries of the Will. The major beneficiary is Panna's son, Ashitkumar Surendra Mehta, also known as Asit Mehta ("Asit"). He was also the sole executor named in the Will. Asit died on 18th May 2009.

(2.) Jaswantbhai's wife, Veena, died on 3rd March 2000, about four years before Jaswantbhai passed. Jaswantbhai and Veena had no children of their own. Jaswantbhai had three sisters, Ramaben Krishnalal Shah, Indiraben V Bankley and Trilochanaben T. Fozdar, and a brother Kanhaiyalal Dalal. Ramaben and Indiraben died before Jaswantbhai. He was, therefore, survived by Trilochanaben and Kanhaiyalal, his surviving siblings.

(3.) After Jaswantbhai died, Asit sought probate. He filed Testamentary Petition No. 243 of 2004. That petition was opposed by Trilochanaben and by three of Ramaben's children (Panna, Jitendra and Kishore). It was renumbered as Testamentary Suit No. 22 of 2004. Kanhaiyalal died on 10th May 2007 without leaving any heirs. Asit filed Notice of Motion No.104 of 2007 to dismiss the caveats filed by Ramaben's children, contending that they had no caveatable interest, since, at the time when succession opened, Jaswantbhai's heirs in law were Trilochanaben and Kanhaiyalal, and they took before, in preference to, and to the exclusion of Ramaben's children. The Notice of Motion succeeded, and Ramaben's children's caveats were dismissed.Ashitkumar Surendra Mehta v Trilochanaben Thakorlal Fojdar, 2008 (4) Bom. C.R. 372.