Basudeva Panigrahi,J. - (1.) This application has been filed for revocation of probate granted of by virtue of the order dated 16th February, 1998 passed in P.L.A. No. 85 of 1998, petitioner has claimed herself to be the daughter of Late Bikramjit Roy. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are her sister and brother. The petitioner as also the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased Bikramjit Roy through his first wife, Ruth Ray.
(2.) The deceased died on 20th April, 1987. At the time of his death it is claimed that he left behind a testamentary disposition in favour of the respondent No. 1, Seema Roy. The petitioner is said to have received a telecommunication from Mrs. Gopa Roy on 10th December, 1999 that M/s. R.C. Kar. Solicitors & Advocates firm had, by a letter dated 6th December, 1999, informed her that their client respondent No. 1 had obtained extension of the probate in respect of Indian assets, namely, premises No. 192B, 192 Cand 192D, N.S.C. Rose Road, Calcutta. Accordingly, the petitioner therefore, on being learnt that such an extension order of probate had been taken by the respondent No. 1, filed and present case for revocation of the same.
(3.) Mr. Mitra, the learned senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in this case serious irregularties and illegalities had been committed by the respondent No. 1 who by suppression of material particulars had taken out a probate from this Court on 16.2.1999. It has been further contended that in the application for letter of administration no authenticated copy of the Will was piroduced. A further formidable point has been raised that since the respondent No. 1 failed in her application to cite in all her near relations, therefore, such application ought to have been dismissed.;