SUDHIR KUMAR SINGH Vs. DHARNIDHAR JHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Article 227 challenging the order dtd. 14/1/2020 passed by the District Judge, Darbhanga in Probate Revocation Case No. 17/2019 whereby the learned District Judge rejected the petition dtd. 8/11/2019 filed on behalf of the petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'

(2.) Brief facts of the case is that petitioner Sudhir Kumar Singh, son of Sri Nageshwar Singh, filed Probate Case No. 07/2018 on the basis of registered will deed dtd. 15/5/1966, executed by his grandfather, late Shatrughan Singh. It was mentioned in the probate petition that after executing the deed of will, the testator handed over it to the petitioner but that was destroyed. Thereafter, the petitioner obtained certified copy of that deed and applied for probate. The final order was passed and will was probated, vide order dtd. 17/12/2018 and a certificate was issued of the probate of will on 20/12/2018. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1, Smt. Sudhira Jha, (now has died and substituted by her heirs and legal representatives) filed revocation petition on 13/9/2019, which was registered as revocation case No. 17/2019 under Sec. 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' The applicant of the revocation petition, Late Sudhira Jha, mentioned that the will deed dtd. 25/5/1966 was forged, fabricated and fraudulent. She has purchased the land which is subject matter of will from Nageshwar Singh, father of the petitioner through two sale deeds dtd. 4/5/1981 and 6/5/1982 in the name of Smt. Neelam Kumari who is her Benamidar. Smt. Sudhira Jha and Smt. Neelam Kumari compromised the case in Lok Adalat and it was held that the property was purchased by Sudhira Jha.

(3.) Learned senior counsel, Sri. Sanjay Singh, for the petitioner has submitted that respondent Sudhira Jha cannot file a petition for revocation of the probate order granted in favour of the petitioner since Sudhira Jha is stranger to the family. His second submission is that the said transaction was barred by the provisions of Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988.