TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 873X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... termina-tion of the right, title and interest which the Applicant has acquired by virtue of a Will dated 1.10.1987 executed in his favour by the testarix Dr. Mrs. Raseel Kohli, now deceased. It has been further pleaded that the application is being moved from the date that he gained knowledge of the pendency of these proceedings. The legal submission that the Applicant is a necessary and proper party and has a right to be heard in the pending probate petition is thereafter made. 2. Various objections have been raised by the Petitioner but in my opin-ion these do not call to be dealt with in specific and separate detail. Admittedly, the alleged Will dated 1.10.1987 has not seen the light of day heretofore. Considering the fact that there was no blood relationship between late Dr. (Mrs.) Raseel Kohli and the Applicant and also because the Applicant is not in possession of property bearing No. 6-B, Jangpura Exten-sion, Mathura Road, New Delhi, probate proceedings, for giving judicial imprimatur to the Will dated 1.10.1987 ought to have been initiated much earlier. It would be reasonable to assume that any prudent person would immediately initiate probate proceeding of the alleged W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation Act. The application accordingly fails and, is hereby dismissed but in the circumstances, we shall leave the parties to bear their own costs. 4. It appears to me, with due deference to the Learned Judges, that while correctly appreciating in paragraph 4, that the Apex Court had overruled its earlier view that Article 137 of the Limitation Act applied only to applications made under the Civil Procedure Code, they were influenced by decision rendered on the basis of the old Limitation Act. 5. In Kerala State Electricity Board, Trivandrum Vs. T.P. Kunhaliumma, , Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was held to apply to any petition The conclusion we reach is that Article 137 of the 1963 Limita- tion Act will apply to any petition or application filed under any Act to a civil court. With respect we differ from the view taken by the two Judge Bench of this Court in Athani Municipal Council case (supra) and hold that Article 137 of the 1963 Limitation Act is not confined to applications contemplated by or under the Code of Civil Procedure. The petition in the present case was to the District Judge as a court. The petition was one contemplated by the Telegraph Act fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te for several decades. It could be that some legatees were in possession of the properties with the tacit permission or approval of the other legatees, which approval was subsequently withdrawn. So long as the rights of any particular legatee are to emanate and flow from the Will, probate proceedings ought to be filed atleast within three years from this conjectured withdrawal of permission. That would then be the latest date on which the right to apply accrues . This would be the most appropriate and meaningful interpretation given to the words when the right to apply occurs . The applicant in the present case must surely have been well aware that the Will would beindefatigably contested. His right to apply surely accrued on the death of the alleged Testatrix Dr. Raseel Kohil on 11.10.1987. Yet he chose not to initiate probate proceedings, and over a decade has passed thereafter. 8. There are other considerations which have weighed in my mind for rejecting the application. As has been mentioned, the present petition is for the grant of probate of a Will dated 23.9.1987 stated to have been executed by the mother of the petitioner. The Applicant is not a Class I heir of the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings. In most of the cases, the Court had to consider the applicants being imp leaded as the Petitioners, and from this stand-point, the relevant concern was whether they had the requisite locus standi. The answer given by the Court was in the negative. This ratio would not apply where the applicant wishes to be imp leaded in the petition as a Respondent or Objector in order to resist the grant of probate to the will. The cases relied upon are as follows:- (i) Raja Ram Adult Vs. Lakshmi Narain Adult, ; (ii) Inder Chand Nayyar Vs. Sarvadeshik Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Anr., ; (iii) Edward Waston Coleston Vs. Mrs. Theresa Chitty Ors. ; (iv) Durga Charan Vs. Smt. Bhudibala Naskar Ors., ; (iv) Sarat Chandra Banerjee Vs. Naian Mohan Banerjee Vol. xxxvI Calcutta Services (1909) 799; (vi) Hari Pada Vs. Gobinda Chandra 1948, ILR Calcutta 300; (vii) Mahatma Vs. Thakur Prasad 1950 ILR Calcutta 653; (viii) Smt. Sulochana Debi Vs. Mt. Puranjaya, AIR (35) 1948 Patna 419; (ix) Hari Bhushan Datta Vs. Manmatha Nath Datta Ors., AIR 1919 Calcutta 197; (x) Bhupati Charan Basu Vs. Chandi Charan Basu Mallick . I also do not consider it necessary to refer to the numerous precedents cited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
