2015 (9) TMI 1735 - HC - Indian Laws

Validity of registered sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendants 1 and 2 - permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or in any manner encumbering the plaint schedule property and for costs - seeking impleadment in the suit as a legal heir on the basis of the testamentary document being the alleged last Will of the deceased - HELD THAT - The nature of civil proceedings, which are before the Court, i.e., a claim by the deceased to set at naught the sale deeds already executed. The question is of an impediment in the way of the appellant to even claim any right in the absence of having initiated any proceedings for probate of the Will due to the law being specific here, as well as the other two Courts of Mumbai and Kolkatta, as compared to a different position in the remaining part of the country. The purpose of impleading all the legal representatives arises, as even if there is a dispute of inheritance between the different persons claiming from the deceased, that should not prejudice the proceedings initiated by the deceased and when the inter se rights are determined among the persons claiming estate of the deceased, those could be determined separately or even some time in the same proceedings to come to a conclusion as to who should be the beneficiary of the decree, if any, passed in the suit - In the present case, the appellant would not be able to claim any part of the estate whatsoever even on the basis of the alleged registered Will because he has not taken any steps for obtaining probate. In fact, the question was conveniently evaded. The appeal is completely meritless and also a proceeding in which ambivalent stands have been taken to somehow get the appeal admitted without answering the Court queries - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Impleadment of the appellant as a legal heir based on a testamentary document.
2. Requirement of probate for claiming rights under a will.
3. Interpretation of Section 211 of the Indian Succession Act regarding the appellant's status as an executor.
4. Impediments in claiming rights without probate in specific courts.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute where the appellant sought impleadment as a legal heir based on a testamentary document after the original plaintiff passed away. The application for impleadment was initially allowed but was later objected to by the defendants, leading to a remittal for a fresh decision on impleadment.

2. The court examined the requirement of probate for claiming rights under a will, emphasizing that probate is mandatory in certain courts like Kolkata, Mumbai, and Chennai. The appellant's failure to initiate probate proceedings despite the lapse of four years since the testator's demise was considered an impediment to claiming any rights under the will.

3. The appellant argued his status as an executor based on Section 211 of the Indian Succession Act, claiming to be the sole beneficiary of the will. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that the appellant did not meet the criteria of an executor or an administrator under the Act.

4. The judgment highlighted the specific legal landscape regarding probate requirements in different courts, noting that probate may not be mandatory in all jurisdictions. The court emphasized the importance of probate in the context of inheritance disputes and the necessity of impleading all legal representatives to ensure fair proceedings.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeal, deeming it meritless and burdened the appellant with costs for taking ambivalent stands during the proceedings. The judgment underscored the significance of probate in claiming rights under a will and the need for clarity and adherence to legal procedures in inheritance disputes.