VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2015 › High Court of Delhi

Mrs Surinder Pal Kaur v. State of Delhi

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
10 September 2015
Bench
S. Ravindra Bhatauthor, Deepa Sharma
Case no.
FAO(OS) 275/2013

Judgment

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

DEEPA SHARMA, J SEPTEMBER 10, 2015 rb

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of decision: 10.09.2015 MRS SURINDER PAL KAUR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.S.C.Maheshwari, Sr.Adv. with Mr.H.C.Kharbanda and Mr.M.P.S.Tomar, Advocates versus STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge of 14.12.2009 in Testamentary Case 48/2005 rejecting the probate application preferred by the present appellant. 2. The facts in brief are that Baba Chakravarti Darvesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the testator') died on 05.09.2003. The appellant propounded a Will said to have been executed by the testator on 07.06.2003. It was inter alia contended that in terms of the Will the appellant, who is the testator's sister-in-law (brother's wife) was the sole legatee entitled to his possessions. Besides bequeathing the "Gaddi" i.e. the control of the religious denomination of the sect of which the testator was a spiritual leader/Guru, the Will also Page 2 conferred rights in respect of a property being property No.E-255, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi constructed on a 250 sq. yards' plot (hereinafter referred to as 'the property'). The appellant applied for probate, claiming to be the sole legatee, in Test. Case.48/2005. 3. The probate application was supported by the affidavits of the legal heirs of the testator i.e. arrayed as respondents 2 to 5. They were the probate applicant's children i.e. brothers and sisters of the testator. The said respondents expressed "no objection" to the grant of probate. On 03.03.2006, the learned Single Judge, before whom the probate petition was listed after citation was published (pursuant to the order dated 29.11.2005) recorded as follows: "Citations have been published and copies of the citations have been filed . There is no opposition from anybody. In so far as other legal heirs are concerned, namely, the respondents 2 to 5, they have already filed their affidavits accepting the Will and given no objection to the grant of probate. Evidence shall, accordingly be led by means of affidavits which shall be filed within two weeks. List before the Joint Registrar for exhibiting the documents on 3rd April, 2006 and before the court for arguments on 8th May, 2006." 4. The probate petitioner relied upon the testimonies of two attesting witnesses Ms.Dalbir Kaur, PW1 and Mr.Kamaljeet Singh besides the testimony of Mr.Gurdev Singh PW4 who claimed to have taken down the Will at the instance of the testator was also relied upon. The testimonies of both the witnesses who have been said to have attested the Will were that the testator, who was sight impaired, Page 3 dictated his wishes to PW4 Mr.Gurdev Singh who then read over the written document to him and that both of them signed on it in the presence of each other. The attesting witnesses further testified that the Will was prepared at 147, Shivalik Enclave, Landram Road, Kharar, District Ropar where the deceased/testator lived. 5. The learned Single Judge considered the evidence of the attesting witnesses and examined the Will. In the impugned judgment, learned Single Judge noticed a discrepancy in the ink and difference in pen, to doubt the presence of the two attesting witnesses. The second ground on which the learned Single Judge doubted the veracity of the depositions of the two witnesses was with regard to the manner in which certain words were written. Thereafter, the learned Single Judge went on to conclude as follows: "7. By the Will, the deceased had handed over "Gaddi" of his Sect/ Organization to his sister-in-law Ms. Surender Pal Kaur on the ground that she was of Dharmik mind. So far as this handing over of "Gaddi" is concerned, nobody would have an objection since this matter relates to his followers. However, he has bequeathed the property bearing number E-254, Greater Kailash

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.