Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR PROBATE CIVIL PETITION NO.5 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI SATHISH KUMAR S/O.LATE C.K.SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT KITHANAHALLI VILLAGE DASANAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-562 130 …PETITIONER (BY SRI SAILESH S.K., ADVOCATE) AND: NIL …RESPONDENT THIS PROBATE CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
Digitally signed SECTIONS 276, 278 AND 300 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH ACT, 1925 READ WITH RULE 5 OF THE RULES GOVERNING COURT OF KARNATAKA PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION MATTERS, 1964, PRAYING TO GRANT PROBATE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER FOR ALL THE ITEMS OF THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE UNION OF INDIA. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: -2- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri Sailesh S.K., learned counsel for petitioner.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking grant of probate in respect of the last Will and testament dated 10.08.1977 of Late Duglamma to have effect throughout India.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner
that during the lifetime of Late Duglamma, she had applied for registering herself as a permanent occupant with respect to inam lands bearing Sy.No.7 measuring to an extent of 1 acre 10 guntas and Sy.No.8 measuring to an extent of 1 acre 16 guntas situated at Gattisiddanahalli Village, Dasanapura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru- 562 130 and subsequently, the same was granted and registered in her favour by the Special Tahsildar of Abolition of Inams, Bengaluru District and she was in possession of the same.
-3- 3.1 This petition is for grant of probate arising on account of the death of Late Duglamma, who died in Mummenahalli Village, Magadi Taluk, Bengaluru Rural on 29.09.1987. Her death certificate is produced and annexed to this petition. 3.2 Learned counsel further contends that Late Duglamma was residing at Mummenahalli Village, Magadi Taluk, Bengaluru Rural, which is situated within the jurisdiction of this Court and this was her fixed place of abode. 3.3 Learned counsel further contends Late
Duglamma was in sound and disposing statement of mind at the time of execution of the Will and had full mental capacity to understand the purport of the Will. The said Late Duglamma was not suffering from any infirmities affecting her mental ability at the time of execution of the Will or otherwise. The Will was duly executed by the said Late Duglamma on 10.08.1977 in the presence of two attesting witnesses. The original Will dated 10.08.1977 is
-4- produced and annexed to this petition and the same is perused. 3.4 Learned counsel contends that the said Late Duglamma decided to adopt the petitioner. Though the adoption was not officially recorded, the fact remains that she had physically taken over the custody and welfare of the petitioner. Therefore, she decided to bequeath her estate in favour of the petitioner and got executed the Will which was duly attested by two witnesses. It is further contended that the petitioner is the sole executrix and beneficiary of the Will. 3.5 Learned counsel further contends that the
petitioner being the executrix and the beneficiary of the Will, is entitled to seek grant of probate of the Will and administer the estate of Late Duglamma. The petitioner hereby undertakes to administer the estate of Late Duglamma and make a full and true inventory of her assets and exhibit the same after the grant of probate and to render the true accounts of the estate.
-5- 3.6 Learned counsel further contends that the net value of the property which is likely to come to the hands of the petitioner upon the death of Duglamma (deceased) is Rs.2,01,87,500/-. 3.7 Learned counsel for petitioner undertakes to pay the maximum Court fee as contemplated under the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 at the time of grant of probate. He has also filed an affidavit of assets of Late Duglamma, which is produced along with the petition.
4. This Court vide order dated 07.07.2025 passed an
order dispensing the notice to the Deputy Commissioner
and allowed the application of the petitioner to take out citation by way of paper publication in the following newspapers: i) 'The New Indian Express', English daily, Bengaluru edition; ii) 'Kannada Prabha', Kannada daily, Benglauru edition; -6- and the matter was posted thereafter for appearance of the parties, if any, on 26.09.2025 before this Court.
5. When the matter was listed before this Court on
26.09.2025, learned counsel for petitioner has filed a memo enclosing the newspapers, which was published on 18.09.2025, wherein the citation was published calling upon the person interested, if any, to put-forth their objections, if any, before this Court opposing the grant of probate.
6. It is seen that pursuant to the citation having been
taken out by the learned counsel for petitioner in the aforesaid two newspapers, there is none to oppose the petition for grant of probate. No one has appeared before this Court to raise objections or to oppose the grant of probate in favour of the petitioner for immovable property pertaining to Late Duglamma. Therefore, in view of there being no objections raised or any claim made by any third party to the publication as ordered, as stated hereinabove,
-7- it can be assumed that there is no objection to the grant of probate with regard to the property belonging to Late Duglamma.
7. It is also seen that the learned counsel has undertaken to pay the maximum Court fee as contemplated under the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958. This Court also by order dated 07.07.2025 dispensed the notice to the Deputy Commissioner.
8. In view of the above facts and circumstances of
the case, there being no objections raised with regard to grant of probate or with regard to any claim over the assets of Late Duglamma, there is no impediment to grant probate as sought for by the petitioner in this petition. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed; -8- ii) Registry is directed to issue probate in favour of
the petitioner, in respect of the last will and testament dated 10.08.1977 of Late Duglamma, to have effect throughout India; iii) Registry is directed to issue probate on payment of requisite Court fee; iv) The filing of the security bond by the surety is dispensed; v) The execution of the security bond by the petitioner is also dispensed; vi) The inventory shall be submitted by the petitioner within a period of six (06) months from the date of grant of probate; vii) The final accounts shall be submitted by the petitioner within a period of twelve (12) months i.e. one year from the date of grant of probate.
Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55