- (1.) This is an application for revocation of the grant of probate by a daughter of the alleged testator on the primary ground that the applicant was not cited. The applicant says that if the applicant had been cited then the applicant could have had an opportunity to contest the authenticity of the Will. The applicant has asserted the suspicious circumstances around the execution and the contents of the Will.
(2.) The two alleged joint executors are the grandson through a son of the alleged testator and the daughter-in-law of the alleged testator. THE Will is said to have been executed in the year 1995 and the alleged testator died in the year 1996. THE alleged joint executors say that the present applicant did not have any connection with the family since the applicant had apparently married against the wishes of her parents and the family had severed all ties with her. THE alleged joint executors say that it was in such circumstances that they were not aware of the address of the applicant. THE alleged executors show that substituted service had been effected by way of publication and they claim that such publication would amount to deemed issuance and service of the citation. The applicant says that the alleged testator was survived by his widow, son and the applicant daughter. The applicant says that there were two immovable properties of the alleged testator which were disposed of by the three heirs of the alleged testator by executing documents in the years 1998 and 2004. The applicant says that all three heirs of the alleged testator had declared in such documents that they were the intestate heirs of the alleged testator. The applicant says that her mother died in the year 2006 which was a year after her brother died. Ordinarily, when an heir-in-intestacy is required to be cited, the Court will be slow to accept substituted service. It is not inconceivable in these days of proliferation of newspapers that an advertisement may be tucked away in one corner of a particular newspaper that may escape the attention of the person it is intended to serve. Ordinarily, a close relative of the propounder or an heir-in-intestacy of the alleged testator may be served by way of substituted service for the legal purpose of service being completed, but upon the first complaint of such heir not being cited, the Court would, more often than not, revoke the grant if cogent grounds for challenging the authenticity of the Will are prima facie demonstrated.
(3.) In the present case, the applicant has said that the immediate predecessor-in-interest of the alleged executors had executed documents along with the widow of the alleged testator and the applicant in the year 1998 and again in the year 2004. There is sufficient prima facie evidence which is disclosed that would tend to discredit the genuineness of the Will. G.A. No. 2327 of 2010 is allowed. The grant of probate in PLA No. 351 of 2007 is revoked. The original grant will be returned by the alleged executors forthwith. The caveat may be lodged by the applicant within a period of seven days from date and the affidavit in support thereof filed within a further week thereafter. In default of either, it will be open to the propounders to seek an ex parte grant.;