SM 1 43.nms.__11. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. _______ OF 2011 IN REVOCATION PETITION (L) NO. 1320 OF 2011 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 610 OF 2010 Vandana D. Bagve ....Petitioner. Versus Kalpana D. Bagve ....Respondent. ____________ Ms. Rajni Iyer, Sr. Advocate a/w Mr. R. A. Shah a/w Mrs. Purvi Asher a/w Ms. Priyanka Choksi i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co. for the Petitioner. Mr. D. K. Mishra, Advocate-Respondent No. 2-present in person. CORAM: D. G. KARNIK, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 26, 2011. P.C.: Leave under Rules 147 and 148 of the High Court Original Side Rules, 1980 granted to the petitioner to take out Notice of Motion in terms of the draft handed in. Office to register the notice of motion as well as register the revocation petition. 2. The facts as narrated in the Revocation Petition and as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant, if true, discloses the clear case of fraud, which vitiates the grant of Letters of Administration. 3. On 21st April, 2010, one lady, who gave her name as Kalpana D. Bagve (for short ‘Kalpana’), made an application (Testamentary Petition NO. 610 of 2010) to this Court for grant of SM 2 43.nms.__11. Letters of Administration to the estate of Vandana D. Bagve (for short ‘Vandana’). In the Petition, she alleged that she was the sole heir and next to kin of deceased Vandana according to Hindu Succession Act, 1956. In the Petition she gave her address as 120-2A, Saibaba Nagar, Near Royal College, Kandivali (W), Mujmbai – 400 092. She annexed alongwith the Testamentary Petition No. 610 of 2010 a photocopy of the death certificate purportedly issued by Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat Vadgaon Budurk, Taluka – Bhadgaon, District- Jalgaon on 19th April, 2010 showing that Vandana had died on 23rd May, 2004. It appears that no notice was issued to any of the relatives or next kin of Vandana as Kalpana had stated in the Testamentary Petition that she was the only near relative of Vandana. After issuing necessary citations, of which the present petitioner was not aware, the Letters of Administration were granted to Kalpana on 20th September, 2010. According to the Petitioner, on the basis of the said Letters of Administration, a Deed of Conveyance has been executed by the said Kalpana in favour of M/s. Reliance Enterprise and which been registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Bandra-6 at Sr. No. 4274/11 disposing of the share of vandana in the immovable property conveyed. 4. The present petition for revocation of the Letters of Administation has been filed by Vandana herself claiming that she is alive and the Letters of Administration to her estate have been obtained by fraud. Vandana is present in the court and is identified by her counsel. The counsel, also, tenders for inspection of the court the original Passport bearing No. A4351072 dated 13th November, 1997 issued by the Regional Passport office, Mumbai, SM 3 43.nms.__11. which is valid up to 12th November, 2017. The counsel, also, tenders for inspection of court an Election Card, issued by the Electoral Registration Officer, dated 21st November, 1994. The original Passport and the original Election Card are returned to the counsel after comparison the counsel for the petitioner. From the photograph of the Passport and the Election Card it appears that the person in the court is Vandana Digambar Bagve and she is very much alive. The petitioner has annexed the Exhibit-D to the petition a certificate issued by Grampanchayat Vadgaon, District – Jalgaon, from which, it is clear that the copy of death certificate which was annexed to the Testamentary Petition No. 610 of 2010 fraudulent copy and no death certificate of Vandana was issued by the Grampanchayat. On this evidence, I am prima facie of the view that the Letters of Administration to the estate of Vandana were obtained by fraud. 5. Mr. D. R. Mishra, Advocate, who is respondent no. 2 in the Revocation Petition is present in person states that he was acting as an Advocate of Mrs. Kalpana in Testamentary Petition No. 610 of 2010 and had filed the Petition on the basis of instructions given to him by a person, who described herself as Kalpana. She was identified by him on the basis of a Pan Card issued by the Income Tax Department. He states that he did not know Kalpana earlier, but would be able to identify the person who had come to him describing herself as Kalpana Bagve. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that FIR is being filed in the concerned police station regarding the fraud. I have no doubt that when the FIR is field, the police would SM 4 43.nms.__11. investigate the matter seriously taking into consideration that, prima facie the Letters of Administration appear to have been obtained fraudulently on the basis of fabricated documents and by personification. 7. In my view, a strong prima facie case is made out for grant of exparte interim relief. From the affidavit of Mr. Pramod Patil, Advocate's clerk, it is clear that the residential address of Kalpana given in the Testamentary Petition probably does not exists and she is also not available on the address given in the Pan Card. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER 1. Issue notice, returnable on 10th October, 2011. 2. Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses a(i) and a(ii). 3. Respondent No. 2 appears in person waives service. All concerned including the concerned police station to whom the FIR will be lodged, shall act upon a copy of the this order authenticated by the Associate. (D. G. KARNIK, J.)