1 cst88-11.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION Chamber Summons No.88 of 2011 in Testamentary Suit No. 44 of 2011 in Testamentary Petition No. 1228 of 2010 Hemlata Chandrakant Mirani .. Plaintiff v/s. Central Bank of India ..Defendant/ Caveator Mr.J.S.Kini i/b. Suresh Dubey for the Plaintiff. Mr.M.G.Gohar for Caveator CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 17th August, 2011 P.C. : 1. The Central Bank of India has filed caveat in the aforesaid Testamentary Petition. Petitioner happens to be the wife of deceased Chandrakant Mirani. She has filed this chamber summons for dismissal of the caveator. The caveator has filed affidavit in reply. Spare copy of the same has been made available to the court as the original is not on record. I have heard learned Counsel on both sides. The caveator is not a heir of the deceased. Caveator claims that the 2 cst88-11.sxw Flat No.4 forming part of the estate of deceased, was mortgaged by the deceased to the Caveator and therefore the Caveator has interest in the litigation concerning the Will of the deceased. 2. I am not inclined to accept this contention of the Caveator. Even if it is accepted for a moment that Flat No.4 which was once upon a time owned by the deceased, was mortgaged by the deceased during his lifetime by itself does not give any caveatable interest to the Central Bank of India. If the loan amount is not paid, Central Bank of India is free to institute appropriate proceeding against appropriate persons. They cannot object to the probate being granted. Hence the said contention is required to be rejected. 3. It was brought to my notice that the affidavit is affirmed before the notary public at Mumbai on 8th June, 2011, whereas it is mentioned in the said affidavit that it is affirmed at Mumbai on 15th June, 2011. According to the learned Counsel for the Caveators this objection goes to the root of the matter and that the affidavit in support cannot be used in support of the Chamber Summons. I am not inclined to accepted this submission. The execution of the affidavit has been done on 8th June, 2011 and that is sufficient compliance as regards execution of the affidavit. That argument is required to be rejected. 3 cst88-11.sxw Hence the Chamber Summons will have to be made absolute. Hence following order is passed. ORDER Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). There shall be no order as to costs. Office shall disregard the caveat filed by the Central Bank of India. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]