( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION USJ FIRST APPEAL NO.372 OF 2009 FIRST APPEAL NO.372 OF 2009 FIRST APPEAL NO.372 OF 2009 Mrs.Ingred Helen Menezes & Anr. ..Appellants V/s. Manoj Raghunath Koli & Ors. ..Respondents ...... Ms.Manisha Pant h/f S.P. Srivastava for the appellants Mr.P.M. Havnur for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Ms.M.M.Deshmukh,AGP for respondent Nos.3 and 4. ...... CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 16th April, 2009 DATED : 16th April, 2009 DATED : 16th April, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. The judgment dated 6th January, 2009 passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court in Suit No.2126 of 1993 is under challenge. The learned Judge dismissed the suit by giving reasons. According to the appellants respondent No.1 could not have been treated as adopted son of Peter Michael Quiney and that he had no right in the Country Liquor License ( 2 ) No.CL-III-146. 2. The record shows that Peter executed the will dated 16th December, 1990 and the said will is duly probated. It is seen that the rights held by the Peter in regard to his share in the partnership firm through the liquor license have been bequeathed to respondent No.1. If this is the position, then respondent No.1 could be able to succeed to those rights and consequently the claim of the appellants that respondent No.1 cannot take any interest in the partnership firm or in the liquor license cannot be accepted. 3. In my view, the learned Judge has considered the entire matter in the proper perspective. Since the Will is duly probated and that effect of the same will have to be accepted and veracity of the said will cannot be gone into. It was argued across the bar by the learned advocate by the appellants that appellants did not receive the notice of the such Will and they were kept in dark with regards to grant of the probate. If this was the position, it was open for the appellants to apply for revocation of the said probate. Needless to say, if provisions of law so permits, appellants can apply for revocation of the probate. Today the order in the probate stands in ( 3 ) favour of respondent No.1. Hence, no fault can be found in the impugned judgment and as such the first appeal is required to be dismissed at the stage of admission. Hence, I pass the following order : ORDER ORDER ORDER . First Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. If the appellants intend to file an application to revoke the probate granted in favour of the Will dated 16th December,1990, they are free to do so and such an application shall be considered on merits. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. . In view of the above, Civil Application No.1301 of 2009 stands disposed of with no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.) (R.Y. GANOO, J.) (R.Y. GANOO, J.)