Bombay High Court
Priyank Paras JainversusParas Ukhchand Jain
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court held that consent of all legal heirs dispenses with the requirement of proclamation and that delay does not preclude the issuance of a legal heirship certificate.
Summary
Priyank Paras Jain filed a miscellaneous petition under Section 2 of the Bombay Regulation VIII of 1827 seeking a Legal Heirship Certificate for his father, Paras Ukhchand Jain, who died intestate on 4 July 2025. The petitioner submitted the deceased's death certificate and consent affidavits from the widow, Pista Paras Jain, and the daughter, Pratiksha Paras Jain, both waiving notice and the requirement of proclamation. The petition asserted that no other heirs exist and that the certificate is needed to transfer property to the petitioner, widow, and daughter. The court relied on Ganapati Vinayak Achwal, holding that the right to apply for an heirship certificate is continuous and that delay does not bar the application. Consequently, the court dispensed with the proclamation and granted the Legal Heirship Certificate, disposing of the petition in the petitioner’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether a legal heirship certificate can be issued without a proclamation when all heirs have given consent.
- Whether delay in filing the petition bars the grant of a legal heirship certificate.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Legal Heirship Certificate
- Intestate succession
- Bombay Regulation
- Proclamation dispensed
- Consent affidavit
- Delay in filing
- Probate
Judgment
32-MPT-992-2026 (OS).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
by MAYUR
TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION
MAYUR KONDIRAM
ADANE
KONDIRAM Date:
ADANE 2026.08.28
19:29:20
+0530
MISC PETITION IN T AND I J NO. 992 OF 2026
Paras Ukhchand Jain ...Deceased
And
Priyank Paras Jain ...Petitioner
__________
Adv. Vivek Khemka i/b Adv. Rushabh Thacker, for the Petitioner.
__________
CORAM : ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 28th AUGUST 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Vivek Khemka, learned counsel for the Petitioner.
2. This Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 2 of the Bombay
Regulation VIII of 1827 ("said Regulation"). By the present Petition, the
Petitioner i.e., Priyank Paras Jain, who is the son of Paras Ukhchand Jain
(“Deceased”) seeks issuance of a Legal Heirship Certificate.
3. It is stated that the Deceased passed away on 4 th July 2025 at
Mumbai. The Deceased was a permanent resident of Mumbai. The Death
Certificate evidencing the death of the Deceased is annexed at Exhibit “A”
to the Petition. At the time of his death, the Deceased was residing at
1011/C, Shatrunjay Darshan, Love Lane, Byculla, GR Mumbai, Mumbai,
Mayur Page 1 of 4
32-MPT-992-2026 (OS).doc
Maharashtra-400027. It is further stated that the Deceased passed away
intestate. Despite due and diligent search, no Will of the Deceased has
been found or discovered.
4. The Petition reflects that the Deceased has left behind the following
legal heirs, i.e. his widow, a son and a daughter, the details whereof are set
out in the table below Paragraph 4 of the Petition, and the same are noted.
5. In this regard, Mr. Khemka, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has
drawn the attention of this Court to the Consent Affidavit dated 31 st July
2026 filed by Pista Paras Jain, i.e. the widow of the Deceased. She has
given her full and free consent and has also waived service of notice for the
issuance of the Heirship Certificate. She has also stated that there is no
requirement of insisting upon proclamation in this regard.
6. A similar Consent Affidavit has been filed by Pratiksha Paras Jain,
daughter of the Deceased, dated 31st July 2026, whereby she has also given
her full and free consent for the grant of the Heirship Certificate in favour
of the Petitioner and has also stated that the requirement of service of
proclamation be dispensed with. The contents of the said Affidavit are
duly noted.
7. The Petition, more particularly, in Paragraph 4, clarifies that save
and except the heirs mentioned in the table above, there are no other heirs
and next of kin left by the said Deceased.
8. It appears that the Legal Heirship Certificate is required for the
Mayur Page 2 of 4
32-MPT-992-2026 (OS).doc
purpose of being produced before the concerned authorities, such as
CIDCO and NMDC, to facilitate the transfer of a plot of land and
bungalow as specified in the Schedule, in the names of the Petitioner, the
Deceased’s widow, and daughter.
9. On the aspect of delay in filing of the Petition, Mr. Khemka, would
place reliance on the decision of this Court in Ganapati Vinayak Achwal1.
The Court held that the right to apply for heirship certificate is a
continuous right which is capable of being exercised as long as object of
the right as an heir exists. Therefore, in the given facts and circumstances,
the issue of delay would not arise.
10. The Petitioner has stated in the Petition that he has paid the
requisite Court fees for the said proceedings.
11. The Petitioner states that no application has been made to any
District Court or District Delegate or to any High Court for probate of any
Will of the said Deceased or for Letters of Administration with or without
Will annexed thereto for Succession Certificate to the property and credits
of the Deceased abovenamed.
12. For the above reasons, and in light of the material on record coupled
with the statements/undertakings contained in the Petition read with the
Consent Affidavits filed, which is accepted, issuance of Proclamation is
accordingly dispensed with, in the given factual complexion. The Petition
1. [2014 MHLJ (6) 683]
Mayur Page 3 of 4
32-MPT-992-2026 (OS).doc
is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:
“a. That the Legal Heirship Certificate may be
granted to the Petitioner certifying that Pista Paras
Jain, Priyank Paras Jain, the Petitioner herein and
Pratiksha Paras Jain, are the legal heirs and
representatives of the said deceased person under
the Provisions of the Bombay Regulation Act VIII
of 1827;”
13. The Petition is Disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs.
14. All parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]
Mayur Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.