AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council.
The judgment of this Court reversed that of the Court below and the decree involves the claim or question to or respecting property of the value of over Rs. 10,000. The case, therefore, complies with the requirements of Sections 109 and 110 of the Code and the applicant would ordinarily be entitled to leave as a matter of course.
But, it is contended on behalf of the opposite party that the applicant has no locus standi to present the present application. The applicant is the widow of the predeceased son of the testator. The question at issue between the parties was whether Probate could be granted of the alleged Will of the testator. Various questions were raised in the proceedings between the parties and this Court differing from the learned District Judge in the. Court below, directed that no Probate should issue.
It is contended on behalf of the opposite party that Srimatya Gendamoni Debya the applicant before us, has no locus standi since in no event is she entitled to succeed to the estate of the testator. In my opinion we are not competent in this Court to enter upon the question whether the applicant has any locus standi to maintain the application. She undoubtedly filed a caveat in the Court of first instance. The opposite party did not apply to have that caveat discharged. In other words the opposite party recognized that the applicant was a proper party to the Probate proceedings. The opposite party was the appellant in this Court and he made Srimatya Gendamoni Debya a party respondent to the appeal. That being so, Srimatya Gendamoni Debya is, in our opinion, entitled to maintain the application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council.
The application succeeds. Issue the usual certificate.
The petitioner is entitled to the costs of this application. Hearing fee five gold mohurs.