SARAL PATWAR Vs. SUSHILA DASSI
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Sm. Sushila Dassi, the opposite party in this Application, has made an application before the District Delegate, Alipore, 24-Parganas, for granting probate in respect of the alleged will of late Lachmani Dassi, Benarasi Lal Patwar was the brother of the deceased testatrix, Lachmani Dassi, and he was also the father of the propounder, Sm. Sushila Dassi, and of Saral Patwar, the petitioner in this Revisional Application. On 24th July, 1981 said Benarasi Lal Patwar had appeared in the probate case filed by her daughter, Sm. Sushila Dassi and had purported to give his consent to the granting of probate in respect of the alleged will of Lachmani Dassi. On 4th September, 1981 Sm. Girija Patwar, the wife of said Benarasi Lal Patwar, had appeared in the said probate case and had filed a caveat. Thereupon, the said case had been treated as a contested one and registered as a suit.
(2.) On 14th April, 1982 said Benarasi Lal Patwar, died and thereupon his widow, Girija Patwar, who was the plaintiff in the said case had filed an application for bringing on record the present petitioner and others heirs and legal representatives of deceased Benarasi Lal Patwar. On 21st April, 1982 the court had rejected the said application holding, inter-alia, that in his lifetime Benarasi Lal Patwar having given his consent to the grant of probate, his heirs had no locus standi to challenge the alleged will of Lachamani Dassi propounded by Sm. Sushila Dassi. Girija Patwar had herself claimed title in respect of Premises No. 2/1, Sambhu Babu Lane, Calcutta -14 mentioned in the alleged will made by Lachmani Dassi. Girija Patwar, inter-alia, claimed that Lachmani had no right to bequeath by will the said property. Girija Patwar's caveat was not entertained and the application for probate filed by Sm. Sushila Dassi was again treated as an uncontested one.
(3.) In July,1982 the present petitioner filed two applications before the District Delegate, Alipore, 24-Parganas.He stated that he was one of the legal heirs of Lachmani Dassi after the death of his father, Benarasi Lal Patwar. He had come to learn that the general notice was served on 25th May,1982.He alleged that Sm. Sushila Dassi had propounded a fictitious will only to deprive the rights of the petitioner and others. Saral Patwar, the petitioner, prayed that he may be allowed to contest her application for granting probate. He also prayed before the learned district Delegate for appointing a hand-writing expert to compare the signature of his father, Benarasi Lal Patwar, in the declaration with his alleged admitted signature in the Vokalatnama and the written objection in Case No. 54/76-TR-387/76. The applicant alleged that the signature appearing in the declaration giving consent to the grant of probate was not the genuine signature of his father, Benarasi Lal Patwar and the said consent was a forged document.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.