Sudhir Sanjeev Chowta v. Sanjeev Kanthappa Chowta (Deceased)

Before: Shri. P. A. Jagdale, Officer on Special Duty, With Testamentary Department Date: 10th December, 2024 FOR COMPLIANCE:

85. TP/4150/2024 [Original] (ECHCBM020419620 24) with WILL/1635/2024 P. C. : Ms. Devyani Dhawale i/b Flavia Legal Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner 1) This petition is filed by petitioner, being one of the legatee under the Will executed by Sanjeev Kanthappa Chowta (herein after the same is referred to as "Testato"), for grant of a Letters of Administration with Will annexed. Said Testator said to have died at Mumbai on 09-112018 Petitioner, namely DR. SUDHIR SANJEEV CHOWTA, filed the copy of death certificates, identity proof of the testator, Will, petitioner's oath.

2) Perused petition. Heard Ld. Advocate for petitioner. Perused documents.

3) The petitioner has explained the delay vide Rule 382 of the Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rule, 1980(for short "Rules").

4) Umesh Ramanna Shetty an executor renounced an executorship by his affidavit. Hence, the petitioner is the sole Legatee under the Will. Hence, petition is tenable.

5) Petitioner stated that the deceased left behind his last Willand Testament which was duly executed at Mumbai on 28.02.2018, in English language. The original Will is handed in separately for being filed and kept in a safe place in the Office of the Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay.

6) Ld. Advocate for petitioner submits that parents of deceased predeceased testator and testator was survived by legal heirs, as per the provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The petitioner is the sole survivng legal heirs of the testator. The petitioner affirmed that there are no

other legal heirs of the deceased.

7) 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 been 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 collector has been issued vide Rule 396 of BHC Rules. Till today, no one appeared to resist the claim of the petitioner or nothing is brought to the notice regarding pending litigation pertaining to the same properties. Hence, the petition is treated as uncontested one.

8) The petitioner has filed the affidavit of Harshil Panchal and Laxman Poojary Attesting Witnesses to the Will, in form No.102 of Bombay High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1980. He deposed that he was present and deceased signed the Testament in presence of him and another witness, after going through its contents. Hence, enough evidence is on record to accept the execution of the Will and petitioner is succeeded to prove the execution of Will. Petitioner filed Additional Affidavit of Harshil Panchal. According to him all additions and alteration in a Will were existed at the time of execution and before singing the Will. Hence, there is sufficient compliance of the Rule 383 of the Rules.

9) Properties mentioned in the schedule-I of the petition are referred in the Will.

10) P etitioner has executed the administration Bond in the prescribed format. Hence, following order:

ORDER

1) Petition is granted.

2) Office to issue Letters of Administration with Will annexed to the petitioner, renouncing the right of the Executor namely Umesh Ramanna Shetty, upon satisfaction that the administration Bond is properly executed, as

per the Rules, thought State of Maharashtra.

3) Before issuance of Letters of Administration with Will, the office to verify that there is no cross Petition is pending or caveat is filed. Office to act accordingly.

10th December, 2024 Officer on Special Duty, with Testamentary Department