https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297839 Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was read according to its plain language: the High Court may suspend, remove or discharge a private executor or administrator, and the statute does not restrict who may apply to a beneficiary or legatee accepting the Will. A caveator or Will-contestant was therefore not barred from seeking removal, and the Court declined to add a limitation not expressed by the legislature. The Court also held that a petition under Section 301 could stand as an independent proceeding after amendment, and an earlier misdescription could not defeat maintainability. en-us Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2021 07:18:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297839 Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was read according to its plain language: the High Court may suspend, remove or discharge a private executor or administrator, and the statute does not restrict who may apply to a beneficiary or legatee accepting the Will. A caveator or Will-contestant was therefore not barred from seeking removal, and the Court declined to add a limitation not expressed by the legislature. The Court also held that a petition under Section 301 could stand as an independent proceeding after amendment, and an earlier misdescription could not defeat maintainability. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297839