DURGAGATI DEBI Vs. SAURABINI DEBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises out of an application, made under Section 50 of the Probate and Administration Act, for the revocation of letters of administration with the will attached granted to Umasundari Debi, the mother of the testator on the 21 of May 1875.

(2.) The testator Paramatma Lal Goswami executed a will on the 5 of April 1875 and died the- same day, leaving him surviving his mother Umasundari, and his wife Saurabini, who was at that time enceinte. On the 6 April the mother Umasundari applied to the Sub-Registrar, and had the will registered at her house on that day. Then on (he 24 of April, she applied for letters of administration with the will attached; and on the 21 May 1875 an order was passed granting the issue of letters of administration with the will attached, and on the 18th June 1875 letters of administration were in fact issued to her.

(3.) Saurabini Debi, the widow of the deceased, gave birth to a daughter Durgagati, the present applicant, on the 12 September 1875; and on the 3 of July 1876, Saurabini applied for the grant to her of letters of administration to the estate of her husband and at the same time stated that Umasundari, to whom letters of administration had previously been granted, wished to be relieved of the administration. A petition was put in purporting to be a petition from Umasundari consenting to the application. But on the 19 July 1876 another petition was put in by Umasundari herself disclaiming the genuineness of the petition put in on uer behalf on the previous 3 July and objecting to the grant of the letters of administration to Saurabini Debi, Saurabini's application appears then to have been rejected, and on the 2nd August 1876 Saurabini put in two applications, one, applying for revocation of letters of administration with the will attached granted to her mother-in-law on the ground that the mother-in-law had concealed facts contained in the will; and the second petition applying for letters of administration for herself. The application for revocation was rejected; and on appeal to the High Court on the 19 June 1877 that decision was confirmed.