Full Text
Translation output
$-21 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
TR.P. (C) 9/2008
SMI. SUSHILA GOPALAN & ORS. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Manu Nayar, Advocate.
TR.P. (C) 9/2008
SMI. SUSHILA GOPALAN & ORS. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Manu Nayar, Advocate.
VERSUS
SHRI R.K. CHAWLA & ANR. Respondents
Through: Mr. R.S. Sahni, Advocate for R-1&2.
Through: Mr. R.S. Sahni, Advocate for R-1&2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
18.03.2010 The Court has considered the submissions of the parties.
The petitioner seeks transfer of various proceedings pending on the file of the
District Judge stating that common questions of facts are involved. It is an undisputed fact that the proceedings pertain to the grant of probate in respect of the Will dated
3.6.1995 of one Shri R.C. Chawla. There are four probate proceedings (two before this
Court and two before the Court of ADJ) and a Civil Suit which has apparently been stayed under Section-10.
Counsel for the respondents states that one of the probate proceedings is at an advanced stage and that evidence is to be recorded. Whatever be the circumstances as to the proceedings, it is apparent that since the Will propounded is common in all the four probate proceedings, transfer of few of them or all of them on the file of this Court, would not be in the interest ofjustice as that would prolong the dispute. In the event of
TR.P. (C) 9/2008 Page-1
2010:DHC:15451 the Will being proved or probate refused in one of the proceedings, the same would operate in rem.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the relief of transfer is not called for.
It is clarified that the rejection of this petition is premised upon the respondents' objection. The respondent Nos.l&2 are represented. It is submitted by their counsel that the conduct of the trial would not be objectedto on the ground of pendencyof other proceedings.
18.03.2010 The Court has considered the submissions of the parties.
The petitioner seeks transfer of various proceedings pending on the file of the
District Judge stating that common questions of facts are involved. It is an undisputed fact that the proceedings pertain to the grant of probate in respect of the Will dated
3.6.1995 of one Shri R.C. Chawla. There are four probate proceedings (two before this
Court and two before the Court of ADJ) and a Civil Suit which has apparently been stayed under Section-10.
Counsel for the respondents states that one of the probate proceedings is at an advanced stage and that evidence is to be recorded. Whatever be the circumstances as to the proceedings, it is apparent that since the Will propounded is common in all the four probate proceedings, transfer of few of them or all of them on the file of this Court, would not be in the interest ofjustice as that would prolong the dispute. In the event of
TR.P. (C) 9/2008 Page-1
2010:DHC:15451 the Will being proved or probate refused in one of the proceedings, the same would operate in rem.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the relief of transfer is not called for.
It is clarified that the rejection of this petition is premised upon the respondents' objection. The respondent Nos.l&2 are represented. It is submitted by their counsel that the conduct of the trial would not be objectedto on the ground of pendencyof other proceedings.
TR.P. (C) 9/2008 is accordingly rejected, but in the aboveterms.
Order dasti.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J MARCH 18, 2010 /vd/
Order dasti.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J MARCH 18, 2010 /vd/
TR.P. (C) 9/2008 Page-2 vo
2010:DHC:15451
2010:DHC:15451
JUDGMENT