Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea By Deceased's Mother Against Legal Heirship Certificate To Son Of Deceased Excluding Her

The petitioner's pending suit seeks a declaration that the deceased was her son and challenges his alleged adoption by her husband's brother.

Justice Manish Pitale observed that the son of the deceased while seeking dispensation of proclamation in proceedings for legal heirship certificate was not bound to disclose the petitioner's suit to the court as the suit has not yet been decided.

The court observed that until the petitioner's claim of being a legal heir is accepted by the competent court, she cannot claim to be an heir of the deceased, and “there is no question of the petitioner making any claim, including a claim that proclamation should have been issued for her to oppose the grant of legal heirship certificate”.

The court dismissed the woman's petition seeking the revocation of the legal heirship certificate stating –

“If the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are to be accepted, any stranger could file a suit claiming declaration with regard to some relation with the deceased and then seek revocation of grant of legal heirship certificate on the basis that proclamation ought to have been issued, merely because the suit was filed and it was pending.”

The petitioner claimed right as one of the legal heirs entitled to a 1/4th share in the estate. She claimed that the wife and children of the deceased suppressed crucial information from the court during the proceedings for the legal heirship certificate, leading to the dispensation of proclamation during the proceedings.

The petitioner her suit in 2023 seeking a declaration of her relationship with the deceased as his mother. The wife and children of the deceased were also named as defendants in this suit. Despite being served notices and appearing before the court during interim proceedings related to the lawsuit, they did not disclose this suit before the court during the proceedings for grant of legal heirship certificate, the petitioner submitted.

She further submitted that the proclamation was also dispensed with based on the consent affidavit filed by the wife and daughter of the deceased in the legal heirship petition filed by the son in 2021. They later withdrew their consent but did not disclose this before the court, thereby playing fraud on the court, she claimed.

The court noted that under Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827, which outlines the procedures for obtaining legal heirship certificates, the purpose behind issuing proclamations in such matters is to provide an opportunity for potential disputants to come forward.

The court underscored that proclamation could only be dispensed with when all legal heirs consent. “Wherever there is a situation that any person entitled to claim the status of the legal heir of the deceased is not before the Court as a consenting individual, proclamation has to be issued. This would certainly require that the person can also claim to be a legal heir of the deceased”, the court added.

However, the court noted that the petitioner's suit was filed two years after the initiation of the legal heirship certificate petition by the son of the deceased. The court observed that that the petitioner's claim of her status as mother of the deceased was yet to be established, as it was subject to the outcome of the pending lawsuit. Thus, the court concluded that the petitioner's claims did not warrant revocation of the legal heirship certificate.

The court found no evidence of suppression or fraud by the son of the deceased regarding the withdrawal of consent affidavits by the wife and daughter of the deceased. While there may have been initial misgivings, they ultimately gave their consent during the final proceedings, the court said.

The court clarified that the issuance of the legal heirship certificate only grants the respondents the right to manage the property of the deceased, without determining the rights of any third party, including the petitioner. The court refrained from commenting on the petitioner's alleged admission regarding the adoption of the deceased, as this matter is pending resolution in a separate lawsuit.

The court dismissed the petition, affirming the validity of the legal heirship certificate granted to the respondents.

Case no. – Miscellaneous Petition (L) No. 24140 of 2023

Case Title – Gitadevi Ramprakash Podar v. Pragnesh Narayan Podar and Ors.