JAGDISH PRASAD TULSHAN Vs. YASHEEL JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was heard along with a cross- objection filed by the respondent and those arise out of an application for grant of Probate in which the learned Single Judge by the order impugned has refused to discharge the caveat lodged by the respondent.

(2.) It appears from the record that the appellant, the propounder of the Will, allegedly executed by one Jagdish Prasad Tulshan, happens to be the only surviving sister of the testator at the time of his death. She prayed for grant of the Probate of the Will alleged to have been executed by Jagdish. In such proceedings, the respondent, namely, Yasheel Jain, who is the son of a predeceased sister of the testator, lodged a caveat claiming that he had interest in the estate of the deceased on two-fold grounds. First, he was the nephew of the testator and secondly, he was the sole beneficiary under an alleged prior Will executed by the testator in respect of the self-same estate.

(3.) The learned Single Judge by the order impugned in this appeal has turned down the objection raised by the propounder on the ground that the caveat filed by the respondent could not be discarded, as he was also an heir. According to the learned Single Judge, the respondent had undisputedly no right as an heir so long the propounder was alive but that did not mean that Yasheel had no right at all. According to the learned Single Judge, the object of the provision incorporating the right to file a caveat is that the person who wanted to lodge caveat should not be a rank-outsider and Yasheel being not an outsider but an heir, the caveat filed by him cannot be discharged. The learned Single Judge further observed that the span of life was uncertain, God forbade, if anything happened to the propounder even subsequently, the objection taken by her would cease to exist.