Chetan Jayanta Roy C.A Of Madhumita Hosali D/O Of Vijay Kumar Hosali v. Vijay Kumar S/O Shivalingappa Hosali (Deceased)

1 69.TP/33/2024 Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date 15th April, 2024 FOR COMPLIANCE:

P.C: Ms. Rasika Pawar i/b Priyanka Tiwari Ld. Advocate for the

69. TP/33/2024 Petitioner (ECHCBM02026 062023)

1) This is a petition for the grant of Letters of Administration, under the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short "IS Act") for the properties left by the deceased, namely Vijay Kumar Shivalingappa Hosali (For short "Said deceased"). The petitioner, namely Chetan Jayanta Roy, Constituted attorney of Madhumita Hosali(a daughter of the decased, has filed documents such as a true copy of the death certificate of the deceased, identity proof of the deceased, and oath in the prescribed format.

2) I have heard Ld. Advocate and peruse the petition along with the documents.

3) Said deceased died on 12-04-1994 at Mumbai leaving behind him legal heirs, shown in paragraph No. 4 of the petition. Petitioner states that there are no other legal heirs to the deceased, except heirs shown in the petition. Deceased left properties are shown in the schedule. The delay has been explained vide Rule 382 of the Rules.

4) Citation was issued, which has been duly affixed on the conspicuous part of the Hon'ble High Court and notice board of the Collector's Office at Mumbai and 14 days have expired vide Rule 397(1) and (4) of the Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules, 1980(for short "BHC Rules") and an affidavit to that effect has been filed. Notice to the collector has been issued vide Rule 396 of BHC Rules. Till today, no one appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner or nothing has been brought to the notice regarding pending litigation about the same properties. Hence, the petition is treated as an uncontested one.

2 69.TP/33/2024

5) Legal heirs of the deceased have consented by way of Affidavits to grant the prayer of the petitioner to grant a Letters of Administration, without reserving any right. They have accepted the facts, regarding their relationship, inter-se.

6) Petitioner has filed the administration Bond in prescribed form No. 118 with surety. However, it is executed for the net amount shown in the schedule-I of the petition. Hence, directions in this regard are required to be given.

7) Ld. Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in view of provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the petitioner, being Constituted attorney of the daughter of the deceased , namely Madhumita Hosali of the deceased, is entitled to seek a Letters of Administration. Hence, facts stated by the petitioner and heirs of the deceased, on oath, remained unchallenged and required to be accepted. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be allowed, as prayed for. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

1) Petition is allowed and the Letters of Administration be granted to the petitioner for properties, left by the deceased and shown in the schedule, in the prescribed format as per the provisions of the Indian Succession Act,

2) The petitioner to execute the administration Bond for the gross amount vide Rule 420 of the High Court(O.S.) Rules, 1980, within two weeks from the date of uploading this order.

3) Before issuance of the grant, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition pending or caveat resisting the petition is filed.

4) The petitioner is to file an account as undertaken in a Petitioner's Oath within the stipulated period. Office to verify that an Administration Bond is properly executed and uploaded.

15th April, 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department