RAM DEO SINGH Vs. RAM NARESH
LAWS(ALL)-2006-7-78
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on July 04,2006

RAM DEO SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
RAM NARESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) SUNIL Ambwani, J. Heard Shri J. Nagar, the Administrator General in support of the application and Shri Namwar Singh, learned Counsel for the caveators objectors.
(2.) THIS is an application filed by the Administrator General, U. P for grant of Letters of Administration to administer the estate of Late Ram Deo Singh (died on 03-6-1995), son of Late Ahibaran Singh, resident of Village and Post Office-Singhawal, Pargana-Chanda, Tehsil-Badlapur, District-Jaunpur. Caveats have been filed by Shri Arun Kumar, Shri Ranjit Singh, Shri Harish Kumar and Shri Kamlesh Kumar. They have also filed their written statement. Earlier Smt. Deo Raji Devi and others had filed an application for Let ters of Administration of the estate of late Shri Ram Deo on the basis of the will dated 1-6-1995 registered on 3-6-1995. The application was contested by Shri Arun Kumar and others (the caveators in this case), who had set up a will dated 2-6-1995 executed by the deceased late Ram Deo in their favour. After framing issues and taking evidence the Court had by its judgment and order dated 25-11-2005, dismissed the T. S. No. 2 of 1999 filed by Smt. Deo Raji Devi and others on the ground that the deceased was serenely ill, hospital ized in a delirious condition and was not in a fit state of mind to execute either of the wills. By the same order the Ad ministrator General was directed to take appropriate steps for administering the estate of the deceased. Smt. Deo Raji Devi filed a Spe cial Appeal No. 76 of 2006, which was connected to Special Appeal No. 108 of 2006 filed by Shri Arun Kumar and others. Both the special appeals were dismissed on 06-2-2006 with the follow ing observations: "parties, i. e. both the appellants and the cross appellants were at pains to submit before us that the present is a will case. The matter has to be decided like in a suit and on a whole reading of the evidence; it cannot be disposed of summarily. We disagree. It is not ordinarily to be disposed of summarily. How ever, if a case of this type comes before a Court where two wills of one or two days before person's death is set up, the Court of appeal is not necessarily bound to spent fur ther time of its, on having the appeal made ready and or reading the whole evidence which connote ever clear up the basic prob lem of the Testamentary Court harbouring reasonable and unbearable suspicion. The appeals are both dismissed. "
(3.) THIS application filed by the Ad ministrator General was directed to be advertised. The Administrator General has filed an affidavit of service annexing therewith copy of daily newspaper peti tion for hearing. Shri Namwar Singh appearing for Shri Arun Kumar and others the caveator objector has raised objections namely (1) that the property is valued at less than Rs. 50,000, which does not permit the Administrator General to ad minister the properties under Section 9 of the Administrator General Act, 1963; and (2) that escheat agricultural proper ties vest in the co-sharers by survivor ship under Section 175 of the U. P Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (In short, the Act) and in their absence are to be managed by the Land Management Committee, under Section 194 of the Act.;


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