Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH PROB. C.P. NO.9/2024 BETWEEN:
1. SRI. PRASHANTH KUMAR PATEL
S/O LATE G.C. PATEL AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.1/4, GURUKRUPA RAJA RAM MOHAN ROY ROAD RICHMOND CIRCLE BENGALURU-560025. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.K.NARENDRA BABU, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. NIL … RESPONDENT THIS PROB CP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 276 AND 300 OF
INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, PRAYING TO ISSUE PROBATE CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO SCHEDULE ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ AND ‘D’ PROPERTIES, STANDING IN THE NAME OF LATE SMT.TARABEN PATEL @ TARBEN GORDHANBHAI PATEL AND ETC. THIS PROB. CP HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 11.07.2025 THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CAV ORDER
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This
petition is filed under Sections 276 and 300 of Indian Succession Act praying this Court to grant a probate certificate in favour of the petitioner in the respect of schedule A to D properties standing in the name of Late Smt.Taraben Patel @ Taraben Gordhanabai Patel and grant such other relief as deems fit in the circumstances of the case.
2. The factual matrix of case of the petitioner
before this Court during the lifetime of the petitioner's mother late Smt.Taraben Patel @ Taraben Gordhanabai Patel W/o Gordhanbai Patel and she has acquired certain movable and immovable properties in her name and she also executed a registered Will vide GAN-3-00265-002016- 17, Book No.3, stored in CD No.GAND 286, dated 31.03.2017 which was registered in the office of the Sub- Regisrar, Gandhinagar, Bangalore.
3. The counsel would contend that the petitioner's
mother passed away on 08.11.2018 and also specific averment made in the petition that Schedule A properties absolutely stands in the name of his mother and in the Schedule B property, she was having 50% of the vacant plot property bearing Anand’s City Survey No.1640 situated at Moje Village, Vallabh Vidya nagar, Kaira District, State of Gujarat which is morefully described in the schedule measuring in all 784.50 square meters. It is also contended that the petitioner’s mother was having another property at Bombay City No.432, Naigam cross road, Wadala, Bombay that there is a plot of land measuring about 5048 square yards, where a house of 3 stored is built along with some more sheds and house wherein his mother has got ½ share which is morefully described in the schedule and the same
was also acquired by way of 50% partner to the National Industries Company.
4. It is contended that mother of the petitioner was
having movable properties like wooden furniture and a walnut showcase and ivory post box which are in the house where the petitioner’s mother was residing along with the petitioner in the said house and the movables are also morefully described in the Schedule D. It is contended that
when the petitioner had approached the concerned department for change of Katha in respect of the schedule properties they have advised to obtain the probate on the registered Will dated 31.03.2017 from the Court and produced the same and then only they were going to change the Katha and hence, without any alternative, approached this Court by filing this petition. After filing of this petition, the petitioner undertaken to pay the maximum Court fee and also sought for permission to take out the citation to be published in Times of India, English Daily
Newspaper, Bengaluru Edition, Bombay Edition and Gujarath Edition and in Udayavani, local daily Newspaper Bengaluru Edition and also in Gujarath Samachar local daily Newspaper, Bombay Edition and so also in Gujarath Edition and accordingly citation was taken and the same is produced before the Court, no objectors appeared before the Court and in view of undertaking of payment of maximum Court fee, issuance of notice to the Deputy Commissioner also dispensed.
5. The petitioner had filed the affidavit of himself
and also the attesting witness and hence this Court posted the matter before the CPC for recording of evidence and evidence was also recorded and having considered the evidence, this Court vide order dated 02.07.2025 comes to the conclusion that evidence on record on oath is not in compliance of Section 63 of Indian Succession Act and Section 68 of Evidence Act and ordered to list the matter
again before the CPC for recording further evidence and accordingly further evidence is recorded.
6. Heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner.
The petitioner’s counsel would contend that Will is marked as Ex.P.1 and the death certificate is marked as Ex.P.2 and also the citations which have been taken were marked as Ex.P.3 to P8. The counsel would contend that the very execution of the Will is poor by examining one of the attesting witness as P.W.2. The counsel would contend that registered original Will is also produced and the same is kept in safe custody.
7. Having heard the counsel appearing for petitioner and also consider the material available on record, the point that would arise for the consideration of this Court are: 1) Whether the petitioner made out the ground to grant the probate as sought in the petition? 2) What Order? POINT No.1:
8. Having heard the petitioner's counsel and also on perusal of material available on record, it is the case of
the petitioner that he is the son of the testatrix Smt.Tharaben Patel @ Tharaben Gordhanbhai Patel and also the specific case of the petitioner that A to B schedule immovable properties belongs to his mother and schedule D is in respect of movable properties. It is also contended that the said assets are bequeathed in favour of petitioner in terms of the Will dated 31.03.2017. The original Will is produced before the Court in safe custody and certified copy is marked as Ex.P.1. Having perused the Will, it is categorically stated in the Will that she has got immovable property at Uttasanda and Maruwad vallabh Vidya Nagar at Gujarat and also the immovable property at Bombay are bequeathed in favour of her son Prashanth Patel who is the petitioner herein including both A to C schedule properties
as well as the D schedule properties of immovable properties and based on the bequeathing of the property in terms of the Will claimed the probate.
9. It is also important to note that the petitioner
himself got examined as P.W.1 and also examined one witness as P.W.2 who is the attesting witness to the Will that is second witness N.Vinayak Kamath and Vinayak Kamath in his evidence deposes that other witness Vidya Kamath is at America and could not be present but, he identifies the signature of the testatrix that is Ex.P.9 as Ex.P9(a to e) and also he identifies his signature as Ex.P.9(f) and also his evidence is that at the time of preparing the Will, she was hail and health and having good sound of mind and also categorically deposed that Will was registered with the Sub-registrar office, Gandhinagar and the same was signed in their presence and thereafter only
they signed the Will and registration procedure was completed.
10. Having considered the evidence, the very
execution of the Will is proved and in spite of citation was taken in terms of Ex.P.3 to P8, none appeared before the Court and objected the same. When such being the case, the very execution of the Will is proved and when such being the case, when there is a recital in the Will in respect of A to D schedule properties, the petitioner has made out a ground to issue the Probate Certificate as sought in the petition. Hence, I answered the point as affirmative. POINT No.2:
11. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
Petition is allowed by granting the probate in respect of the Will dated 31.03.2017 executed by Taraben Patel to have effect through out India in favour of the petitioner as sought subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall file an affidavit of assets and valuation within one month.
(ii) The petitioner shall duly administer the
property and credits of the deceased after making a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same in this Court within six months from the date of issue of probate and
(iii) The petitioner shall render a true account of the property and credits of the deceased to this Court within one year from the date of issuing probate to him. Sd/- (H.P. SANDESH) JUDGE RHS