PURSHOTTAM VASUDEV NAGPAL Vs. RANI LALCHAND KALRO
LAWS(BOM)-2017-10-124
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on October 10,2017

Purshottam Vasudev Nagpal Appellant
VERSUS
Rani Lalchand Kalro Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.D.Dhanuka, J. - (1.) By this petition filed under section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the petitioner has prayed for revocation and cancellation of the original grant of Probate dated 29th September, 2010 with the Will annexed and seeks a direction against the respondent no.1 to deposit the said Will and the grant of Probate dated 29th September;, 2010 with the learned Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court and for other reliefs.
(2.) This Court framed the following issues:- JUDGEMENT_124_LAWS(BOM)10_2017_1.html
(3.) The petitioner is a son of the sister of the deceased late Sattabai Lakhmichand Chhabria, who expired at Mumbai on 7th May, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said deceased'). It is the case of the petitioner that since the respondent nos.2 and 3 are claiming to be entitled to a portion of the estate of the said deceased i.e. Sattabai Lakhmichand Chhabria, they are impleaded as necessary parties to the petition. It is the case of the petitioner that since the respondent no.4 society is illegally threatening to transfer the flat in question which belonged to the said deceased, the said society has been impleaded as the respondent no.4 to the petition. It is the case of the petitioner that he was a constituted attorney of the said deceased under a General Power of Attorney, which was executed in the year 1996 and was registered with the Reserve Bank of India. The said General Power of Attorney was executed in favour of the petitioner by the said deceased being the maternal aunt of the petitioner and also on account of proximity and trust, the said deceased executed the said General Power of Attorney in favour of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the said deceased died issueless. The respondent no.1 is neither the daughter nor adopted daughter of the deceased. According to the petitioner, the said deceased died intestate leaving behind no testamentary writing or Will and did not find any Will or testamentary writing of the said deceased inspite of due and diligence search taken by the petitioner.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.