JOGMAYA SARKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed by the sole applicant Smt. Mausumi Chowdhury for grant of Letters of Administration under Sections 273 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") with respect to the estate and property belonging to late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar: Late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar who is governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law executed a Will dated 28.9.1972 with respect to her movable and immovable properties. There are four attesting witnesses to the Will. They are Yashwant Lal Jain, Ranjit Kumar Ghosh, Shailendra Nath Sarkar and Dr. A.K. Narayan. The testatrix i.e. late Smt. Jogmaya Sarkar had one daughter Priti Chowdhury who alongwith her husband predeceased Jogmaya Sarkar. Priti Chowdhury left behind one son Prabir Kumar Chowdhury and a daughter Hashi Mitra. Hashi Mitra also died leaving behind her husband and three sons as her heirs. The heirs of Hashi Mitra have been described as the near relations of the applicant. The applicant in this case is the wife of Prabir Kumar Chowdhury.

(2.) IN terms of the different provisions of the Act, general citation was published in two local newspapers, namely, Dainik Aaj on 4th February, 2008 and the Hindustan Times on 5th February, 2008. The heirs of Hashi Mitra appeared in this case and filed a vakalatnama on 14.3.2008. On behalf of the heirs of Hashi Mitra, several dates were given to the Counsel of the near relatives to file a caveat/objection, however, no steps were taken by the heirs of Hashi Mitra to file a caveat/objection in this case and finally on 10.7. 2008 the Court ordered that the matter should proceed in accordance with law and as such, this matter has came up for final hearing.

(3.) REGARDING the facts with respect to the provisions of the Will, it has been stated that originally the Will contained several properties which have now shrunk and revolve around a water body situated in the town of Patna. It is further submitted that AW -2 Pradip Sarkar is also a co -sharer in the said water body. As far as the claims of the heirs of Hashi Mitra are concerned, it appears that they have lost interest in the matter as they have not appeared after filing their vakalatnama to file objection in this case. As such, it is submitted and it appears to this Court that there is no objection on behalf of any of the person concerned with respect to the provisions of the Will and there also appears to be no evidence to indicate that the Will was executed on account of any undue influence.