Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a suit on the ordinary original civil side could seek revocation of probate granted by the same High Court in its testamentary and intestate jurisdiction, or whether such relief had to be pursued only by petition before the probate side of the Court.
Analysis: Probate under the Indian Succession Act operates as a judgment in rem and is conclusive until revoked for just cause. The scheme of the Act, the High Court Rules, and the Letters Patent shows a clear separation between the ordinary original civil jurisdiction and the testamentary and intestate jurisdiction, even though both are exercised by Judges of the same High Court. Revocation of probate is to be sought before the Court that granted it, by the procedure prescribed for testamentary matters, and not by a civil suit on the original side. The ordinary civil side cannot determine the validity of a will or revoke an existing grant of probate, because that would undermine the finality and proper administration of testamentary jurisdiction.
Conclusion: The relief of revocation of probate was not maintainable in the ordinary original civil suit; the plaintiffs were required to proceed by separate petition before the testamentary and intestate jurisdiction of the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: A grant of probate can be challenged only before the Court exercising probate jurisdiction, and not by a civil suit in the ordinary original jurisdiction of the same High Court.