TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 1182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or letters of administration filed by the respondent in this Court in respect of the estate of deceased Triza Domnic D'souza. The respondent claims to be the grandson of the said deceased. 3. Both the petitioners have urged before this Court that the grant obtained by the respondent is liable to be revoked on the just cause under section 263(a), (b) and (c) r/w Illustrations (v) and (vi) to section 263 of the Act. Mr. Korde, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in Miscellaneous Petition No. 69 of 2012 and Mr. Damle, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in Miscellaneous Petition No. 5 of 2013 submit that to the knowledge of the respondent the said deceased had left a Will dated 23-2-1966. The learned counsel invited my attention to the averments made in Testamentary Petition No. 722 of 2010 filed by the respondent in this Court and in particular paragraph 3 thereof. 4. In paragraph 3 of the said petition, the respondent has averred that the said deceased died intestate and due and diligence search had been made for a Will but none had been found. On the premise that the said deceased died intestate and had not executed a Will, the responde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the petitioners in the petition for letters of administration did not arise. It is submitted that in any event both the petitioners are claiming title adverse to the alleged title of the deceased testator and thus could not have maintained any caveat and thus have no locus to file these petitions for revocation of the grant of succession certificate under section 263 of the Act. 8. The learned senior counsel then submits that in any event, even in the said Will executed by the said deceased in the year 1966, the said deceased had not bequeathed the property in which the petitioners claim rights and thus on that ground itself the petitioners cannot be allowed to apply for revocation of the grant issued in favour of the respondent. The learned senior counsel submits that even if the said property would have been part of the bequest of the deceased testator, the petitioners cannot be allowed to urge the allegations of fraud, fabrication or that the respondent made false statement in the letters of administration since none of the petitioners have caveatable interest and the petitioners having claimed interest adverse to the alleged title of the deceased and in view of the Testame....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... letters of administration in favour of the respondent. Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, fairly does not dispute that the said deceased had left a Will in the year 1966. It is, however, submitted that the same was not to the knowledge of the respondent when the said petition was filed. 13. Insofar as the issue of locus standi raised by Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned senior counsel is concerned, Mr. Korde, learned senior counsel does not dispute that the petitioners are not the legal heirs of the said deceased. It is also not disputed that in the petitions filed by the petitioners, the petitioners have disputed the alleged title in respect of the deceased testator. The learned senior counsel, however, submits that even if this Court comes to the conclusion that the petitioners have no caveatable interest in the estate of the deceased, the petitioners are entitled to urge and bring to the notice of the Court that the letters of administration have been fraudulently obtained by the respondent by concealment of material facts. 14. In my view, Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned senior counsel is right in his submission that a party who has no caveatable ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd thus such statement came to be made in the petition for letters of administration is accepted, in view of the fact that there is no dispute that the said deceased left a Will and/or the same is discovered subsequently, such grant is liable to be revoked under section 263(b) and (c) of the Act. A conjoint reading of Illustrations (v) and (vi) to section 263 of the Act makes it clear that even after the administration of the estate, if the Will is discovered subsequently, such grant is liable to be revoked. 19. I am not inclined to accept the submission of Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned senior counsel that merely because there was no specific bequest in the Will of the deceased in respect of the plots in which the petitioners claim interest, the petitioners cannot be even allowed to urge and bring to the notice of this Court the fact of fraud, fabrication or concealment. In my view, Court can take cognizance of the allegation of fraud, fabrication or concealment even at the instance of a party who claims even a slightest interest in the property of the deceased. Once the allegation of fraud, fabrication or concealment is brought to the notice of the Court, which is alleged to have bee....