LATE RAJO SINGH RAMAUTAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the caveat filed by Smt. Manorama Devi objecting to grant of probate of the Will of late Rajo Singh. The applicant has challenged the locus standi of the caveator. The relevant facts are as follows : Rajo Singh died issueless leaving behind a widow Smt. Gaytri Devi on 5/06/1974. Ramautar Singh alias Ganesh Shanker who claims to be his nephew filed the application for grant of probate of the Will said to have been executed by Rajo Singh on 19/05/1972. Notice of the application was issued to Gaytri Devi. A general citation was also published in the newspaper. On 9/04/1991 Gayatri Devi appeared and filed two petitions, one for transfer of the case to the District Judge, Gaya and the other, to dismiss the application for probate. By orders passed on 13/12/1991 and 27/03/1992 respectively, the petitions were rejected with an observation that she may file caveat in accordance with law. It may be stated here that the said two petitions had been verified and affidavited by Smt. Manorama Devi describing herself as Bhabhi (brother's wife) of Gayatri Devi. Thereafter two witnesses were examined and discharged on July 10 and July 31, 1992. Gayatri Devi filed caveat on 25/05/1993. The said caveat was affidavited by one Dwarika Singh. The office pointed out certain defects. An affidavit was later filed on 9/11/1993 stating that the petition dated 21/05/1993 be treated as part of the affidavit. Another caveat, this time in the prescribed form, was filed by her on 16/11/1993. Nothing, however, was stated as to the objection to grant of probate. The maintainability of the caveat was heard. On behalf of the applicant plea was taken that the caveat had been filed by imposters and Gayatri Devi was not being allowed to come in the picture. It was also pointed out that the delay in filing affidavit, which is required to be filed within 8 days of the lodging of the caveat had not been explained. This Court accepted the contentions urged on behalf of the applicant and by order dated 7/02/1994 rejected the caveat. Gayatri Devi later died on 10/06/1994. The present caveat by Manorama Devi was filed on 13/12/1994.

(2.) The caveator apart from taking the usual plea that the Will in question is forged and fabricated has stated that Gayatri Devi had made a gift of the entire property left behind by Rajo Singh in her favour under registered deed dated 21/02/1990. She has also stated that the applicant herein had instituted Title Suit No. 29/90 to restrain Gayatri Devi from making transfer of the property and, after the execution of the deed, to add her (Manorama Devi) as party defendant which was rejected by the Court.

(3.) On the question of locus standi of the caveator, Mr. Sheo Dayal Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Manorama Devi submitted that even a bare possibility of interest is sufficient to entitle a person to enter caveat. The caveator having got the property from the sole heir of the deceased, she has vital stakes in the outcome of the proceeding and, therefore, she must be held to have interest in the estate of the deceased. Mr. L. N. Das appearing for the applicant, on the other hand, contended that the caveat petition filed by the donor having been rejected, it would be preposterous to entertain the caveat of the donee. It was pointed out that the order of this Court dated 7/02/1994 rejecting the caveat of Gayatri Devi has been upheld by the Supreme Court in SLP No. 6066 of 1994.