Bombay High Court
Khandu Vishnu PhapaleversusVishnu Bhau Phapale alias Vishnu B Phapale alias V B Phapale
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- MILIND N JADHAV
Holding
The court held that a legal heirship certificate may be issued to all legal heirs notwithstanding the title dispute, and that such issuance does not adjudicate ownership of the property.
Summary
The deceased left three sons—Khandu, Bhausaheb and Hari—and his wife had predeceased him. Khandu filed a petition for a Legal Heirship Certificate under Section 2 of the Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 to facilitate dealings with a specific immovable property. After a proclamation, Hari and Bhausaheb (through an affidavit in Hari's favour) appeared and contested the entitlement to the property, which has been in Hari's name since 2005 and is subject to disputed writings. The Court held that the grant of a legal heirship certificate can be issued to all three heirs despite the title dispute, but clarified that the grant does not determine ownership of the property, which must be resolved in a civil suit. The petition was allowed, the grant ordered within two weeks, and no further proclamation was required.
Issues considered
- Whether a legal heirship certificate may be issued when there is a dispute over title to the immovable property.
- Whether issuance of the certificate determines ownership of the property.
- Whether any further proclamation is necessary before granting the certificate.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Legal Heirship Certificate
- Succession
- Immovable Property
- Title Dispute
- Bombay Regulation VIII
- Civil Court Jurisdiction
- Probate
Judgment
13. MPT-410-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
MISC. PETITION NO. 410 OF 2026
Vishnu Bhau Phapale alias
Vishnu B. Phapale alias
V.B. Phapale .. Deceased
Khandu Vishnu Phapale .. Petitioner
....................
Ms. Seema Hunnurkar i/by Mr. Mohan Gawade, Advocates for
Petitioner
Mr. Rudresh Jagdale i/by Mr. Rohit Mangsule, Advocates for
Respondent
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : MAY 8, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Ms. Hunnurkar, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Mr.
Jagdale, learned Advocate for Respondent.
2. Deceased has three sons. The wife had predeceased him. There
names are Khandu, Bhausaheb and Hari. Khandu has filed the
Application for issuance of grant which is Legal Heirship Certificate in
respect of declaration of legal heirs under Section 2 of the Bombay
Regulation VIII of 1827. Purpose of seeking grant is stated in the
Petition with regard to particular immovable property. However
proclamation is issued and on receipt of proclamation, Mr. Jagdale
learned Advocate appears for the other two legal heirs i.e. Hari and
Bhausaheb. Bhausaheb has given affidavit in favour of Hari. Khandu
1 of 3
13. MPT-410-26.odt
is Petitioner on one side and Hari, the other son on the other side are
contesting entitlement to the subject immovable property on the basis
of certain writings which are executed in the past. Be that as it may,
insofar as the present Petition is concerned, it is with regard to grant
of Legal Heirship Certificate and Khandu has prayed for the legal
Heirship certified to be granted in the names of all three legal heirs of
deceased. Therefore there can be no impediment in allowing the
Petition.
3. However Mr. Jagdale would submit that the property which is
the subject matter of Petition is standing in the name of Hari sine 2005
and thereafter certain writings are executed between the parties which
are in dispute. Khandu is disputing the entire position. In such a
scenario, there can be no impediment in allowing the grant, but it is
clarified that issuance of grant in the Petition filed by Khandu ipso
facto does not mean that the concerned immovable property for the
purpose for which it is filed shall be transferred in the name of the
Petitioner on the basis of the grant. To that extent parties are
relegated to the Civil Court and whichever party desires to contest and
prosecute their substantive right for entitlement to the immovable
property are entitled to do so strictly in accordance with law. Issuance
of grant is not determination of title in favour of any of the legal heirs
to the property
2 of 3
13. MPT-410-26.odt
4. Grant be issued subject to all other compliances within a period
of two weeks from today. No further proclamation is required to be
issued.
5. Petition is allowed and disposed.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally
signed by
RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.05.11
17:36:08
+0530
3 of 3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.