Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2001 DAILYLAW 1623 (DEL)

CHANDER KANTA ANAND FOUNDATION (PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST) v. STATE OF DELHI

2001-08-10

V S Aggarwal

body2001
Delhi High Court (August 10, 2001) 2001 (TLS)125721 2002-AD (Del)-1-263 :: 2001-ILRDLH-7-105 CHANDER KANTA ANAND FOUNDATION (PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST) Vs. state of delhi V. S. AGGARWAL ( 1 ) PETITIONER No. 1 Chander Kanta Anand Foundation is alleged to be a charitable trust. Petitioner No. 2 Dr. B. R. Anand is the elected Chairman of Petitioner No. 1. They have filed the present Petition under Section 276 of the Indian Successions Act for grant of the probate of Mill dated 6/12/1998 of late Smt. Chander Kanta. It has further been pleaded that respondents No. 2 to 5 are the legal heirs of deceased Chander Kanta. She had left an unregistered Will dated 6/12/1998, whereby the entire assets have been converted into a charitable trust for benefit of medical research? medical relief etc. Petitioners claim that. Petitioner No. 1 should be granted probate of the Mill of late Chander Kanta. ( 2 ) THE citation was published in two daily newspapers. There was a 5 no objection filed from the public. Respondents No. 3 to 5, who are the children of the deceased, have filed their no objection. ( 3 ) IN order to prove the Will of the deceased, the Petitioners examined Dr. B. R. Anand, A. W. 1. He stated that he has brought the original resolution s copy, which is Ex. AW-1/1. He also produced death certificate of Chander Kanta. The witness added that the deceased had executed a Mill Ex. AW-1/3 in his presence and he had signed as one of the attesting witnesses. ( 4 ) DR. Sudha Salhan, A. W. 2 also made a Similar statement pertaining to the execution of the Will. She stated that the deceased had executed the Mill Ex. AW-1/3 in her presence and she is one of the attesting witnesses. ( 5 ) THESE facts establish that the deceased, whose death certificate has been proved to be Ex. AW-1/2 had executed a valid Mill in sound disposing mind bequeathing the property to the trusts which is Petitioner No. 1. ( 6 ) THE valuation of the assets had been effected, In that view of the matter, it must be held that petitioner No. 1 is entitled to the probate claimed. Order is nade accordingly. It shall be issued only on payment of the required court fee, as per their valuation. --- *** --- .