JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The above application being
G. A. No. 2721 of 2004 has been taken out
by the propounder/executor of a testamentary document dated 18th April, 1999 of the
above testatrix Priyamvada for discharge of
Caveats lodged by one Krishna Kumar Birla,
Basanta Kumar Birla, one Ganga Prosad
Birla and one Yasha Bardhan Birla. Sri R.
S. Lodha, applicant herein says that the
aforesaid four persons have no caveatable
interest in the estate of the Priyamvada Devi
Birla since deceased (hereinafter referred to
as the Lady)) as they do not have any slightest interest in the estate left by the Lady.
Only Laxmi Devi Newar and Radha Devi
Mohta the sisters of her late husband
Madhab Prasad Birla, since deceased (hereinafter in short M. P.) are the heiresses and
legal representatives to succeed the estate
left by Lady in case of death intestacy. Obviously, it is the caveators at this stage who
are to establish their right to maintain the
caveats. In their affidavits in opposition in
answer to the aforesaid charge four persons
have separately stated as follows :
G. P. Birla stated in his affidavit that in
1981 both the deceased lady and her husband namely M. P. Birla pursuant to
agreement had executed mutual Wills, both dated
10th May, 1981. On 13th July, 1982 by consent they revoked the said mutual Wills but
agreed once again, each other, as to disposition of their respective estates on their
death in favour of the public charities as
ultimate beneficiary and those Wills made
pursuant to such agreement would be irrevocable and would remain unaltered. He
says he is one of the surviving co-executors
of the Will of the Lady. By this Will the Lady
directed the executors to take possession of
her entire estate and make over, donate or
settle the same for the purpose of charity at
their absolute discretion. That apart he has
claimed that he is the paternal first cousin
of late M. P. and if the genealogical table is
looked into then it will appear that this deponent has possible chance of succeeding
to the estate of the Lady in case of death
intestacy. He is also co-owner of the disposed
of property namely orchards at Kumaun. The
deceased was the member of a larger Birla
family so also this deponent. The Birla family at all material times carried on and still
carries on several businesses through different companies. In some of these companies there
is an interweaving shareholding
in such a manner that they are part of complex pattern and thus evidence of involvement of
the members of the Birla family is
apparent in such companies in management
thereof the different members of the Birla
family. The deceased testatrix and the deponent are in reality co-trustees and/or in
fiduciary capacity to all the shareholders of
such companies and different members of
the Birla family including those who are
shareholders of such companies whether
directly or indirectly, where both of them
were in management. The deceased was a
trustee and/or in a fiduciary relationship to
the deponent and other members of the Birla
Family including himself who has shares
directly and/or indirectly where the deceased was in management.
(2.) Basant Kumar Birla being one of the
caveators in his affidavit while explaining
his caveatable interest has stated among
others that he is the paternal first cousin of
late M. P, Birla, the husband of the testatrix. He was one of
the co-owners of the orchard along with said testatrix. The deceased
and this caveator till the time of her death
were directors of Century Textiles Industries
Ltd. of which he is the Chairman and Pilani
Investors and Investment Corporation Ltd.
He is the member of the Birla Family along
with the said testatrix. There is an interweaving of shareholdings in such a manner
that they are part of well thought out pattern, and evidence of the involvement of
members of the Birla Family in such companies and co-management
thereof by different members of the Birla Family though
a particular branch may be looking after a
particular group of companies of the Birla
family. The deceased testatrix and this caveator are in reality co-trustees and/or in a
fiduciary capacity to all shareholders of such
companies and different members of the
Birla family including those who are shareholders of such companies, whether directly
or indirectly, where both of them were in
management of the deceased was a trustee
and/or in a fiduciary relationship to him and
other members of the Birla family including
himself who held shares directly or indirectly
in such companies where the deceased oversaw its operation after the demise of her
husband.
(3.) The Caveator Yashovardhan Birla in
his affidavit in opposition has stated his
caveatable interest amongst other as follows :
The Lady and his caveator at the time of
her death were co-trustees in a charitable
trust known as R. D. Birla Kalyan Nidhi
Trust. The Lady and M. P. had voting rights
in the Bombay Hospital Trust on account of
donation made by them to the said hospitals and as per Rules and Regulations of the
said Bombay Trust such voting right vests
in the male descendant of the deceased. He
(this caveator) being eldest surviving male
descendant of the Lady, is entitled to such
voting right and this voting right cannot be
taken away by a testamentary disposition.
The Lady and this caveator are members of
the Birla family. The Birla family at all material times carried on and still carries on
several businesses through different companies, in some of these companies there is
interweaving of shareholding in such a manner that they are part of a complex pattern
and evidence the involvement of members
of the Birla family in such companies and
co-management thereof by different members of the Birla family. The members of the
Birla family in carrying on such business
do act as trustees and/or in fiduciary capacity to all shareholders of
the said companies as also the other members of the Birla
family including those who hold shares directly or indirectly in such companies. The
Lady and this caveator are in reality co-trustees and/or in fiduciary capacity to
all shareholders of the said companies and different
members of the Birla family including those
who are shareholders of such companies.
The properties sought to be bequeathed by
and under the above testamentary
instrument purport to include properties under
the possession of the deceased which comprised of other ancestral properties of late
M. P. or were acquired out of funds generated by the larger Hindu Family governed
bv the Mitakshara School of Law which had
not been partitioned and/or comprised of
undivided family properties governed by
Mitakshara School of Hindu Law.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.