$-26 + % m THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 35/2010 PREETI JAIN & ANR Through Mr. T.P.S. Kang, Advocate. versus STATE & ORS Through Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT ORDER 08.11.2010 Petitioners Respondents 1. This jointpetitionseeks probatein respectofa Will dated IS''^ April, 2000 made by Mrs. Sudesh Jam (hereinafter called "the Testatrix"). 2. The first petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the testatrix and the second petitioner is the son of the first petitioner. It is submitted that by the Will, the testatrix had made a dispositions of her properties which includes House No.190, Tagore park. Model Town, Delhi, in favour of the petitioners. A copy of the death certificate in support of demise of the testatrix is armexed with the petition. The petition also discloses the names of the other legal heirs and representatives of the testatrix. They have been impleaded as Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. It is submitted that the said legal representatives/respondents have no objection to the grant of probate. Test Gas No.35/2010 PageNo.lofS (b Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified 3. The Will, produced as Annexure P-1 and formally exhibited as PW-l/A on 4.10.2010is stated to have been attested by Mr. S.B. Mathur and one Mr. Sudama Arora. It is stated that the suit propertywas the testatrix'sself-acquiredpropertyand that she wished to bequeathit to the present petitioners. The affidavitof one of the attestmg witnessesShri S.B. Mathur was filed in complianceof the provisionsof Section281 of the Indian Succession Act at the time the present proceeding was initiated. Said Shri S.B. Mathur later deposed in favour of the Will and identifiedthe signatures of the testatrixas well as his signatures. By his statementdated 4.10.2010, Shri Mathur, PW-1 submittedthat the testatrixhad signedthe Will mhis presenceand ua the presenceofMr. Sudama Arora. The other attestingwitnessesand that both of them had signed in the presence of each other and the testatrix. 4. Pursuant to the notices issued in these proceedings, respondents No.2 to 5 appeared and filed no objection statements of the affidavits. The statement of Shri Rohit Jain, the fifth respondentstatingthat he had no objectionto the grant of probateto the present petitioner was recorded on 4.10.2010. Likewise, the statements of the other respondents i.e. respondents No.2 to 4 Shri, Bhushan Jain, Shri Vikas Jain and Shri Gaurav Jain were recordedon 1.11.2010. They too deposedthat they had no objection to the grant of probateto the presentpetitionerand further supportedthe affidavitsfiled by them. 5. Having consideredthe entire material and the pleadings on record, the Court is satisfied that the testatrix signed the Will in accordance with law and that the same was duly attestedas deposedby the attestingwitnessShriS.B. Mathur. In the circumstances, Test CasNo.35/2010 Page No.2 of 3 the Court sees no impedimentin the grantof probateto the petitionerand acceptingthe Will as having been duly signed. The Court at the same time notes that the testatrix did not constituteor nominateany executor. In the circumstances,by virtue of Section235 oftheIndianSuccessionAct, the Courtis of theopinionthatthe firstpetitionershouldbe appointed as Administrator, to carry out the mandate in the Will. 6. The petitionerbe issued Lettersof Administrationalong with copy of the Will to be issued in favour of the first petitioner subject to her furnishing Administration and Securitybonds to the satisfactionof the Registrar. The petitionershall also pay the differentialCourt fees between what was paid and the amount payable pursuantto tlie valuationgrantedby the RevenueAuthorityfor a sumof Rs.89,50,140/-. 7. List beforethe JointRegistraron 15^^ November,2010 for furtherproceedingsto enable the petitionerto take steps in accordancewith the directions. The petitionTest Cas No.35/2010 is allowed in the above terms. NOVEMBER 08,2010 vk. Test Cas No.35/2010 S. RAVINDRA BHAT,J Page No.3 of 3