Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FAO No. 58/2014 & CM No.3829/2014 26th February, 2014
MR.SHARAT CHANDRA SHARMA & ANR. ......Appellants
Through: Mr. Manoj Singh, Adv.
Through:
To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
CM No.3828/2014 (Exemption)
JUDGMENT
1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. CM stands disposed of. FAO 58/2014& CM No.3829/2014(stay)
2. Appellants, two sons, were the petitioners who had sought probate in the court below on the basis of the Will of their mother Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma dated 20.1.1999 by claiming that the Will bequeathed the property D4&5, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, Delhi in their favour. 2014:DHC:1089
3. Admittedly, as per this Will the suit property was to devolve upon the husband of Smt. Shanti Devi and father of the petitioners namely Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma, and petitioners were to get rights only if the husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma died before the testatrix Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma. It was not disputed before the court below and even before me that Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma/husband died after the death of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma. Therefore, as in terms of the Will of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma her husband Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma, father of the petitioners, became the owner of the suit property. The father Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma thereafter died intestate and therefore all the legal heirs of Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma including the petitioners would become co-owners of the suit property. Petitioners therefore derived no rights as per the Will of the mother dated 20.1.1999.
4. I cannot agree with the argument urged on behalf of the appellants/petitioners that the petitioners are entitled to a probate of the Will dated 20.1.1999 of Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma, inasmuch as, a normal reading of the Will shows that the petitioners were to only get interest in the property bearing no.D-4 and D-5, Vishwas Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi if Sh. Chheda Lal Sharma died before Smt. Shanti Devi Sharma, and which has not happened. The subject Will dated 20.1.1999 therefore has worked itself out giving ownership rights in the property to the husband Sh. Chheda Lal and therefore petitioners cannot claim any rights on the basis of the subject Will dated 20.1.1999 and consequently are not entitled for probate of the same.
5. In view of the above, there is no merit in the appeal, and the same is therefore dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
FEBRUARY 26, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. ib