OM TRIJUG NARAYAN SINGH ALIAS TRIYUG NARAYAN SINGH SON OF SRI KAMALA SINGH Vs. ESTATE/GOODS OF LATE AYODHYA SINGH SON OF BABU ISLOK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 9.9.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge XII, Patna in Letters of Administration Case No.123 of 2000, fded under section 218 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, whereby the application of the appellant for grant of letters of administration in his favour was rejected, hence preferred this appeal.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that one Ayodhya Singh, who was unmarried, executed a Will dated 4th of January, 1983 in respect of his landed property in favour of the applicant-appellant, being one of his nephews. The said Will was attested by attesting witness Udai Kumar Singh and the signature of the testator was identified by Ram Narayan Singh. Further case is that the applicant used to look after the testator all along and out of love and affection he executed the aforesaid Will. The said Will was scribed as per the direction of the deceased. After understating the contents of the Will, in the sound state of mind and good health, the testator signed on the Will. The attesting witnesses also on tne request of the testator signed the same. The scribe also put his signature and thereafter the Will was presented for registration and the same was registered on the same day. The testator was identified by one Ram Narayan Singh. The testator later died on 11th of June, 1991 leaving behind his nephews Ganesh Singh and Ram Ladoo Singh, including the applicant in whose favour the Will was executed.

(3.) Mr. Keshav Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the court below has committed serious error of law and fact in rejecting the application since, admittedly, particulars of the near relatives were mentioned in paragraph 2 of the application. As such, the court below was not right in observing that the other legal heirs were not made parties. It is submitted that the detailed particulars of near relatives are required to be given so that notices could be issued to them. As a matter of fact, notices were issued to those persons and general citation, too, was issued. However, despite notice as also general citation, no, one, including the respondents, appeared to contest the application. Learned counsel further submits that the Will in question was proved and marked as Ext. 1. As regards the signatures over the Will, the witnesses appearing as A.W.I and A.W.2 have categorically stated that only on the direction of the testator, the Will was scribed and after understanding the contents of the Will, the testator signed in their presence as also the attesting witness, namely, Udai Kumar Singh put his signature. The signature of the testator was identified by one Ram Narayan Singh. However, both of them as also the scribe were dead. As such, the court below has committed an error in observing that not a single signature over the Will was proved. As a matter of fact, signatures were proved, however, exhibits were not mentioned by the Counsel with respect to each of the signatures. As regards the observation of the court to the effect that the application was filed after a long lapse of time, it is submitted that after the death of the testator, the application for grant of letters of administration or probate of a Will could be filed on any day when the right to apply accrues and since the right to apply accrues everyday after the death of testator, as such no fixed starting point of limitation could be fixed." In this regard learned counsel relies on a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ramanand Thakur v. Parmanand Thakur, 1982 AIR(Pat) 87. It is, accordingly, submitted that the order rejecting the application deserves to be set aside.