BASHIST NARAIN SAHI Vs. SIA RAMCHANDRA SAHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Chengan Sahi of Muzaffarpur died on 18 March 1904. He left a widow, Mt. Rajo Kuer, and a son Sheoratan. Some years before his death he had built a temple to house certain deities and maintained it at his own cost. Under his will executed on the day before his deaths he bequeathed three properties to be dedicated to the deities and to be managed by his widow as shebait and after her death (which has not yet occurred) by his son Sheoratan (who however died in 1908).

(2.) The residue of his property he bequeathed to Sheoratan but in the event of Sheoratan's death without issue then absolutely to the deities aforesaid and in such circumstances the entire income of the estate was to be applied to various charitable, educational and religious purposes and the administration of the estate was directed to lie: in the hands of five respectable persons of Mauzas Chandrapati and Kamtaul, but in case of difference of opinion amongst them and in case of mismanagement or irregular expenses the direction of the Collector of the district shall prevail.

(3.) After his death the widow obtained a limited grant of probate in common form and in so far as the three dedicated properties were concerned and Sheoratan came into possession of the residue of the property under the terms of the will and as stated above, died in 1908. In 1910 one Mt. Rama Kuer claiming to be a daughter of the testator lodged an objection to the widow's probate alleging that the will was a forgery and the widow surrendered the probate in Court and it was revoked without contest. In 1924 the widow executed a surrender of her interest in the properties in favour of Mt. Rama Kuer. The present case arises out of a joint application for probate of the will as to the whole estate by six persons. No. 6 claims to be the Pujari of the temple. The others claim to be inhabitants of Mouzas Chandripati and Kamtaul and to be qualified under the terms of the will as quoted above. There are caveats by Mt. Rajo Kuer, who has not appeared, by Mt. Shampati Kuer, the widow of a cousin of the testator who supports the will but herself asks for probate by a group of reversioners and gotias of Sheoratan, by Mt. Rama Kuer and her son who deny the genuineness of the will, by creditors of Mt. Rajo Kuer and by others.