Bombay High Court upholds dispensation of fresh citation in grant of letters of administration and dismisses challenge

A division bench of Justices B. P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla heard an appeal challenging a Single Judge’s order dated 19 August 2019 (corrected on 5 September 2019) that dismissed Miscellaneous Petition No.18 of 2018. The appellants had sought revocation of Letters of Administration De Bonis Non issued in 2009 and of an earlier Probate, and also challenged an ex parte order dated 21 August 2009 which dispensed with service of a fresh citation in Testamentary Petition No.445 of 2008.

The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Single Judge’s conclusions that the order dispensing with service of citation did not require interference and that the miscellaneous petition was rightly dismissed on grounds of delay and for lack of merit. The Court explained that Sections 258 and 259 of the Indian Succession Act applied to grants in respect of estates left partially unadministered where a Probate already existed, and that in those circumstances the Court “can dispense with the citation” because objections of next of kin would already have been considered when the original Probate was granted. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “In our view, in light of the same, and since all objections from the next of kin, if any, would have been considered whilst granting the original Probate, the serving of a citation to the next of kin can be dispensed with in a Petition filed under Sections 258 and 259.” The bench further noted that the appellant’s explanation for delay was not supported by evidence and that public notices, registered transfers and subsequent court proceedings showed the appellant could not reasonably claim ignorance of the grant.

Background The dispute arose from the estate of the late Narsingrao Pupala. He executed a Will dated 7 March 1974 leaving equal shares to his wife Sudhabai and son Pratap; Probate of that Will was granted in 1978. Sudhabai executed a Will in 1984 in favour of Pratap and obtained Probate in September 1984. Sudhabai administered portions of the estate and died in February 2006 leaving some assets unadministered. Pratap filed Testamentary Petition No.445 of 2008 under Section 258 seeking Letters of Administration De Bonis Non (with the Probated Will annexed) for the unadministered estate; by praecipe he sought dispensation of fresh citation on the basis that heirs had either given consent affidavits or withdrawn caveats. By order dated 21 August 2009 the High Court dispensed with service of citation and, on 17 September 2009, issued Letters of Administration to Pratap. Public notices were published in June 2010 and Pratap executed and registered transfers of undivided shares in June 2010.

The original appellant, Nandkumar (Nandu), had earlier filed and withdrawn a caveat in the 1976 probate proceedings and had executed letters indicating consent at that time. In November 2017 / December 2017 Nandu lodged the present petition alleging that the Will of Narsingrao “was forged and fabricated” and that withdrawal of caveats had occurred under “harassment” and “duress.” The Single Judge dismissed the petition in August 2019 on the grounds of delay and on merits, holding that dispensation of citation was lawful in the context of Sections 258–259 and that the appellant’s delay and explanations were not satisfactory. The division bench found the Single Judge’s reasoning sound, distinguished authorities relied on by the appellant as relating to original grants (not grants under Sections 258–259), and affirmed dismissal of the appeal. The Court recorded that it would not make any order as to costs.

Case Details: Case No.: Appeal No.138 of 2024 in Miscellaneous Petition No.18 of 2018 in Petition No.445 of 2008 Case Title: Nandkumar Narsingrao Pupala since deceased through legal heirs Shakuntala Nandkumar Pupala and Ors. — Appellants Versus Dr. Pratapsingrao Pupala — Respondent Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Zubin Behramkamdin, Senior Advocate; Mr. Shubham Jadhav; Ms. Sakshi Kashyap; Ms. Meiron Damania i/b M/s. Divekar & Co., Advocates For the Respondent(s): Mr. Fredun Devitre, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Alpana Ghone; Mr. Paresh Shah; Ms. Meghna Mehta i/b M/s. Shah & Sanghavi, Advocates