PURNIMA HALDER Vs. AJOY KUMAR BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been filed challenging an order dated June 29, 2019 passed by the learned District Delegate/Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kalyani, Nadia in Miscellaneous Case No.60 of 2017 L.A. (grant of letters of administration of the estate of Mohanlal Banerji, since deceased).

(2.) The opposite party no.1 filed an application for grant of letters of administration of the estate of Late Mohanlal Banerji before the learned District Delegate at Kalyani, Nadia. The same was registered as Misc. Case No.60 of 2017 (L.A.). According to the applicant/opposite party no.1, Late Mohanlal Banerji died intestate leaving his last will and testament and bequeathed the estate to Abhimanyu Bhattacharjee Memorial Trust. The applicant no.1 is the trustee and joint managing director of the said trust. On the strength of said will the application under section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) was filed. The petitioners filed two applications; one, to contest the proceedings for grant of letters of administration; and the other for inspection of the will. According to the petitioners, the wife of Late Mohanlal Banerji, that is Late Latika Banerjee, by a deed of gift bestowed the property in question to the petitioners. The petitioners have started developing on the same by entering into a development agreement during the lifetime of Late Latika Banerjee. Subsequently, the petitioners were shocked to discover a notice from the learned court affixed on the property with a intimation that a proceeding for grant of letters of administration of the estate of Late Mohanlal Banerji had been instituted. The petitioners filed two applications as stated hereinbefore. The said applications were considered by the learned court below and by the order impugned dated June 29, 2019 the applications were dismissed by the learned court below on various grounds. The learned court below held that although the deed of gift may have been genuine, yet the petitioners could not have a caveatable interest.

(3.) According to the District Delegate, the petitioners/objectors failed to show that they have a caveatable interest in the property. The proceedings could not be termed to have become contentious and as such the District Delegate by the order impugned decided to proceed with the applications for grant of letters of administration without allowing the contentions of the petitioners.