Shakuntala Taxali vs State (Delhi Administration) and Others

Manmohan Sarin, J.

(1) Vide a judgment dated 6th April, 1995 the probate petition filed by the petitioner under Sections 276 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of probate of the Will and letter of administration to the estate of Smt. Vidyawati Taxali was allowed. The petitioner executed the administration-cum- surety bond. Vide orders dated 4th July, 1995 the petitioner was required to furnish two sureties as the value of the estate was above Rs. 1,000.00.

(2) The petitioner by this application is praying that the petitioner be directed to furnish only one administration-cum-surety bond. In other words the administration-cum-surety bond furnished by Smt. Soma Wati Kapoor as surety be accepted without the additional requirement of furnishing one more surety bond.

(3) Learned Counsel has pointed out that this was not a contested matter and all the legal heirs of the deceased had been served and filed affidavits affirming the execution of the Will and conveying no objection to the grant of probate of the said Will and letter of administration in favor of the petitioner, who was the executor under the Will. Learned Counsel has also referred to the case Shambu P. Jaisinghani Vs. Kanayalal P. Jaisinghani and Others, ,where the very requirement to give the administrative bond was waived since the Will was in favor of the natural heirs, as is the case in the present instance.

(4) Having regard to the averments made in the application and the submissions made, the requirement for execution of the second administrative-cum-surety bond is dispensed with. is stands disposed of.