Anahita Kaikhusru Batliboi v. Soonabai Jehangir Batliboi

Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.2379 OF 2024 Anahita Kaishushru Batlibo and others ] Petitioners Soonabai Jehangir Batlibo ] Deceased .....

Mr. Nilesh Modi a/w Prantap Mahadevia, S.P. Mathkar i/b Rastomji & Ginwala and for Petitioners.

.....

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

nd April, 2025.

DATE : 22 P.C:

1.

Captioned Testamentary Petition seeks de Letters of Administration in respect of properties and credits of one Sunabai Jehangir Batlibo (the deceased) who is stated to have passed away on th April, 1947. The matter is on board pursuant to an application made by the petitioners who claims to be the beneficiaries and only legal heirs of the deceased.

2.

Mr. Modi, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has invited my attention to the order dated 28 th December, 2024 passed by the Officer on Special Duty with a Testamentary SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE SHRIKANT HALKUDE Date: 2025.04.23 10:15:17 +0530

Department which reads thus;

"1. Ld. Advocate for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of the Honble Delhi High Court in case of Rajesh Sinha & Ors. Vs. State [2015(151) DRJ 434]. She submitted that the petitioner is widow and sole surviving legal heir of the deceased as per the Provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Hence, law laid down in the said decision as well as the directions issued by the Honble Court in TP No. 2556/2022, 2559/2022 and 2918/2023 are applicable to the present case, and thus the petitioner is exempted from execution of an administration Bond.

2.

The order, referred by Ld. Advocate for the petitioner, is passed in the Testamentary Petition for letters of administration. This petition is for letters of administration with Will Annexed. It is admitted that as per the petition, the petitioner is widow of the deceased and as per the Will, she is sole legatee. There are no other legal heirs of the deceased.

3.

However, it would be proper to seek direction of the Honble Court to extend the direction given in the above referred order to present case.

4.

S. O. to 10.01.2025".

3.

From the above, it is clear that the Office was to seek certain directions from this Court. Today, no one is present from the Testamentary Department nor Court is apprised of directions that are sought for. Hence, let the Registry submit the report indicating as to what specific directions are sought from this Court to enable the Court to rule upon the same. Let the report be filed within one week from today.

th April, 2025.

4.

Stand over to 29 [ARIF S. DOCTOR J.]