MR. RAHUL SATIJA vs GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
$~4 (Original Side)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 25.04.2024
+ TEST. CAS. 66/2018
MR. RAHUL SATIJA ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikas Kumar, Adv.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar and Ms. Preeti, Advs. for R-2 to 5.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
SACHIN DATTA, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeking grant of probate with respect to an unregistered will dated 12.01.2013 left behind by his late father Sh. Parabh Dyal Satija (hereinafter referred to as the testator). The petitioner is stated to be the executor of the aforesaid will. The aforesaid will is stated to be the last will and testament of the deceased testator.
2. The testator is stated to have passed away on 23.08.2015, at 2613/194, Tri Nagar, Delhi-110035 leaving behind his wife respondent no.2, the minor son and minor daughter of his pre-deceased daughter respondent nos. 3 and 4, respectively, and two sons i.e., the petitioner and respondent no.5.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the late testator was the owner of the property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025 which is stated to be in possession of the petitioner and his brother respondent no.5. The aforesaid property is stated to be the self-acquired property of the late testator.
4. The late testator is also stated to be the owner of the following movable properties:
i. Bank Account NO 910010050543385 AXIS BANK, TRINAGAR BRANCH, Delhi.
ii. Bank Account No. 10577082766 STATE BANK OF INDIA, INDERLOK BRANCH, Delhi.
iii. Bank Account No 1513000100516496 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, TRINAGAR BRANCH Delhi (Joint account of the testator with his wife respondent no.2)
5. Other than the abovementioned movable and immovable properties, it is stated in the will dated 12.01.2013 that the testators father late Sh. Tara Chand Satija in his lifetime and from his own resources had bought certain properties, which have not been divided by metes and bounds and a partition suit qua the said properties bearing CS-DJ-No. 93/2016 is stated to be pending before the ADJ, Rohini Court. The said properties are as under:
i. Property no. 2613/196 and property no. 2613/194, Tri Nagar Delhi measuring 231 Sq. Yards in total. The said property is built up in two portions and the same is marked as:
a. Property No. 2613/196 Tri Nagar Delhi-110035 measuring around 77 sq. yards.
b. Property no. 2613/194 Tri Nagar Delhi, 110035 measuring around 154 yards.
ii. Property No. A-70 Majlis Park near Azadpur Mandi, Delhi measuring around 180 sq. yards.
iii. Property No. A-71 Majlis Park near Azadpur Mandi, Delhi measuring around 180 sq. yards.
6. With respect to the property bearing no. A-71, Majlis Park, near Azadpur Mandi, Delhi, the will dated 12.01.2013 states that the testator was the owner of a Property No. A-71 Majlis Park near Azadpur Mandi, Delhi measuring around 180 sq. yards, and that the said property was bequeathed by the late father of the testator, in favour of the testator, by virtue of a registered will dated 10.03.1987 registered vide registration no. 2604, Book No.3, Volume No. 481 at page 171. However, the said property is stated to be in possession of the testators late fathers brother Shri Ram Chand Satija, and is under litigation in CS-DJ No.-93/2016.
7. The will dated 12.01.2013, appears to have been executed in presence of the following two witnesses:
i. Mr. Vimal Raina, R/o F-54, Gali-3, Pandav Nagar, Delhi-110091.
ii. Mr. Sunil Gupta, R/o 3909/16, Kanhiya Nagar, Delhi-110035.
8. Vide order dated 01.11.2018 passed by this court, notice was issued to the respondents in the present petition and it was directed that citation be published in the Statesman (English) Delhi Edition. Vide order dated 08.01.2019, it was recorded by this court that citation had been filed as directed. Vide order dated 27.10.2021 passed by this court, it was recorded that no objections have been filed pursuant to the aforesaid citation.
9. Vide order dated 09.05.2019, respondent no.1 was directed to file a valuation report with respect to the properties in question. Vide order dated 03.09.2021, it was recorded that the valuation report had been filed by respondent no.1 with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025.
10. Vide order dated 13.07.2022, the following issues were framed by this court in the present petition:
i. Whether will dated 12.01.2013 is legal and valid will: OPP
ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed: OPP
11. The petitioner has produced the following documents in support of the present petition:
i. Copy of the will dated 12.01.2013;
ii. Copy of the death certificate of late Parabh Dyal Satija;
iii. Copy of Aadhaar card of late Parabh Dyal Satija;
iv. Copy of electricity bill of property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025, in the name of late Parabh Dyal Satija;
v. Copy of telephone bill of late Parabh Dyal Satija;
vi. Copy of conveyance deed in favour of late Parabh Dyal Satija with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025, in the name of late Parabh Dyal Satija;
vii. Copy of property tax receipt with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025, paid by late Parabh Dyal Singh.
12. The petitioner (PW-1) has tendered his evidence by way of affidavit wherein he has identified the will dated 12.01.2013 as Exhibit P-1. He has also proved the following documents:
i. EXHIBIT P-2-The death certificate of late Parabh Dyal Singh;
ii. EXHIBIT P-3-The copy of Aadhaar card of late Parabh Dyal Singh;
iii. EXHIBIT P-4-The copy of the Electricity bill of late Parabh Dyal Singh;
iv. EXHIBIT P-5- The copy of the telephone bill of late Parabh Dyal Singh;
v. EXHIBIT P-6-The copy of the conveyance deed in favour of Parabh Dyal Singh with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025;
vi. EXHIBIT P-7- Copy of property tax receipt with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025 paid by Late Parabh Dyal Singh.
13. Respondent no.2 (RW-2) has also tendered her evidence by way of affidavit on behalf of herself and on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4, who are stated to be the children of the pre-deceased daughter of the late testator and respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 has stated in the aforesaid affidavit that she has no objection if the probate of the will dated 12.01.2013 is granted to the petitioner, as prayed for in the present petition.
14. Respondent no.5 (RW-1) has also tendered his evidence by way of affidavit, wherein he has inter alia stated that he has no objection if probate with respect to the will dated 12.01.2013 (EXHIBIT P-1) is granted by this court, as prayed for by the petitioner. Respondent no.5 (RW-1) had expressed an objection with respect to the valuation of immovable property stated by the petitioner in para 7 of the present petition. It was stated by the respondent no.5 that the property be valued as per the conveyance deed or as per the valuation report submitted by the SDM. As stated earlier, the valuation report has been filed by respondent no.1/SDM with respect to property bearing No. 16-A MIG Ground floor flat, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110025, and the valuation for the purpose of these proceedings shall be in accord therewith.
15. Section 63(c) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 provides for the mode for execution of will. It states that a will must be attested by two or more witnesses, each of whom should have seen the testator sign or put his mark on the will. Further, Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872 requires the will to be proved by examination of at least one of the two witnesses.
16. In the present case, Mr. Sunil Gupta (PW-2), who is one of the attesting witnesses in the will dated 12.01.2013 executed by late Parabh Dyal Singh has filed his evidence by way of affidavit, wherein he has stated that the will dated 12.01.2013 (Exhibit P-1) was executed by the late testator in his presence. Mr. Sunil Gupta (PW-2) has also identified his own signature on the will dated 12.01.2013 at Point A in the aforesaid will. PW-2 has also categorically deposed that the testator had executed and signed the will dated 12.01.2013 in presence of PW-2 as well as one other attesting witness, i.e., Mr. Vimal Raina.
17. As such, the present petition is uncontested. The citation has been carried out in the newspaper and no objection to grant of probate with respect to the will dated 12.01.2013 in favour of the petitioner has been received from any third person. The testimony of the petitioner (PW-1) and Mr. Sunil Gupta (PW-2) have not been subjected to any cross-examination. Moreoever, the respondent no. 2 (RW-2) and respondent no. 5 (RW-1), who are also beneficiaries of the will dated 12.01.2013 have stated on affidavit that they have no objection if probate with respect to will dated 12.01.2013 is granted in favour of the petitioner.
18. In view of the statements of the witnesses and the documents placed on record, I am satisfied that petitioner has succeeded in proving that the testator had executed the will dated 12.01.2013, which was his last will and testament. None of the respondents have come forward to challenge the will, inasmuch as, they have given their no objection to the grant of probate. Further, the will has been properly proved by producing one of the attesting witnesses. The requirement of Section 222 (1) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 is also met, inasmuch as the petitioner has been appointed the executor of the will dated 12.01.2013 in the aforesaid will.
19. Accordingly, I do not find any impediment in granting the probate to petitioner in respect of the will of testator.
20. For the aforesaid reasons, probate of the will dated 12.01.2013 executed by Late Shri Parabh Dyal Singh is granted to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner paying the requisite court fee and furnishing administrative bond with one surety, to the satisfaction of the Registrar General of this Court.
21. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms.
SACHIN DATTA, J
APRIL 25, 2024/dk
TEST. CAS. 66/2018 page 1 of 7