* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Test Cas No.42 of 2006 Decided on : May 07 , 2014 MRS.ALKA PURI Through: …… Petitioner Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta with Ms.Sahiba Pantel, Advs. Versus …… Respondent STATE Through: None. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.
1. This is a petition for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the estate of deceased Ravindra Nath.
2. Briefly stated that facts of the case are that the present petitioner has claimed herself to be an adopted daughter of late Ravindra Nath and late Smt.Saroj Sharma. It has been alleged in the petition that Ravindra Nath expired on 29.12.2005 while as Smt.Saroj Sharma expired on 30.12.2005. The aforesaid deceased couple did not have a natural child and, accordingly, when the present petitioner, who was just 13½ years old was adopted being the Saroj Sharma’s sister’s daughter. This was done to look after the deceased persons during their old age.
3. It has been further alleged in the petition that after an adoption deed Ex.PW1/3 was drawn, the petitioner came to Delhi and continued to live with the deceased Ravindra Nath and Saroj Sharma at C-32, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi, till the time she got married. It has been further stated that the aforesaid property was the self-acquired property of Ravindra Nath and apart from the aforesaid property, he has left behind various other movable and immovable assets; the details of which are given in Schedules I, II & III consisting of saving accounts, car, house, policies and certificates with Unit Trust of India.
4. It has been alleged that Ravindra Nath had four brothers, namely, Surender Sharma, Virendra Sharma, Shashi Sharma and Vinod Harsh, apart from one sister Shakuntala Dikshit and all of them except Shashi Sharma have given their ‘No Objection’ to the grant of Letters of Administration in favour of the petitioner. So far as Shashi Sharma is concerned, he was served, however, he has chosen not to file any objection despite service.
5. In support of the petition, the petitioner has filed her own affidavit Ex.PW1/X in which she has not only supported the averments made in the petition but has also proved the documents like Death Certificate of late Ravindra Nath ‘Ex.PW1/1’, Death Certificate of her mother late Saroj Sharma ‘Ex.PW1/2’, certified copy of Adoption Deed ‘Ex.PW1/3’ and Affidavit in terms of Schedule III under Section 19-I of the Court Fee Act, 1870 ‘Ex.PW1/4’.
6. Since there was no opposition to the grant of Letters of Administration from the side of the brothers and the sister of the deceased Ravindra Nath, consequently, no cross-examination on their behalf has been conducted., 7. Objections on behalf of Sudesh Kumar Saini, who was in occupation of the portion of the property in question were filed wherein he had stated that deceased Ravindra Nath had made a Will dated 28.10.2005, wherein ground floor and second floor (along with roof rights) with respect to property bearing No.C-32, Gulmohar Park, New Delhi were bequeathed in his favour. However, the said objections were subsequent thereto withdrawn on 18.04.2013. In the light of the fact that the objections dated 05.12.2006 filed by Sudesh Kumar Saini were withdrawn on 18.04.2013 and there is no objection filed by Surender Sharma, Virendra Sharma, Shashi Sharma, Vinod Harsh and Ms.Shakuntala Dikshit, I find that there is no impediment in granting the Letters of Administration in favour of the petitioner in respect of the properties, details of which are given in Schedules, I, II & III.
8. I, accordingly, grant the Letters of Administration in favour of the petitioner in respect of the properties which are mentioned in the aforesaid three schedules, subject to petitioner’s filing the requisite Court fee and furnishing administrative bond with one surety to the satisfaction of the learned Registrar General of this Court. The valuation report from the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority has been received and be taken on record.
9. The petition stands disposed of. V.K. SHALI, J.
MAY07 2014 KA