RAMDAS NARAYAN SAKAT (PLAINTIFF)versusMEENA SAMRAT SAKAT (DEFENDANT)

                                                                         4. TS-120-2025.odt


Amberkar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION


                           TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO. 120 OF 2025
                                          IN
                         TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 1609 OF 2024

           Narayan Baburao Sakat alias
           Narayan Babu Sakat                                     .. Deceased

           Ramdas Narayan Sakat                                   .. Plaintiff
                    Versus
           Meena Samrat Sakat                                     .. Defendant
                                        ....................
            Ms. Bhakti Patil i/by Mr. Prabhu Velar, Advocate for Plaintiff
            Mr. Ashish Dubey a/w Ms. Yogita Kanojia, Advocate for Defendant
                                           ...................
                                          CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                          DATE          : FEBRUARY 27, 2026
           P. C.:

           1.       Heard Ms. Patil, learned Advocate for Plaintiff and Mr. Dubey,

           learned Advocate for Defendant.


           2.       Petition is filed by Petitioner for issuance of Letters of

           Administration in respect of the properties and credits of deceased

           abovenamed who has expired on 21.07.1994. The names and details

           of legal heirs of the deceased are stated in paragraph No. 4 of the

           Petition. Purpose for filing the present Petition is stated in the Petition.

           I have perused the same.


           3.       It is seen that deceased is survived by six sons and two

           daughters. Once of the son of the deceased has also expired in the


                                                                                    1 of 3
                                                                4. TS-120-2025.odt


interregnum. He is represented by Mr. Dubey, learned Advocate. The

details of his legal heirs are also stated in the Petition. To the extent of

giving consent, Mr. Dubey would submit that since the primary

purpose of filing the Petition would be to claim entitlement in respect

of the premises belonging to the deceased which are presently

occupied by the family members of one of the deceased son of

deceased, the said legal heirs have not given their consent. He would

submit that the said premises are going for redevelopment and

therefore the consent has not been given by them.


4.       Ms. Patil, learned Advocate for Petitioner and other legal heirs

would submit that in any event, the claim of deceased son of deceased

in respect of the estate of the deceased would be to the extent of 1/8

share. Be that as it may insofar as the premises which are occupied by

the legal heirs of the deceased son of deceased are concerned, the

orders passed by this Court in the case of Vipul Fatehchand Shah v.

Nav Samir Co-operative Housing Society & Ors.1 and Ritesh Haldar v.

Elie Housing LLP & Ors.2 with respect to corpus, transit rent and other

charges shall govern their respective rights in accordance with law.


5.       Mr. Dubey would persuade me to also include the possession

after redevelopment but that is something which this Court cannot

direct. Entitlement of the legal heirs of the deceased son for their
1    Comm. Appeal (L) No. 25162 of 2023 decided on 06.10.2023
2    2025 SC (Online) (Bom) 6710

                                                                           2 of 3
                                                                     4. TS-120-2025.odt


           occupation of premises which belonged to the deceased will be

           determined in accordance with law. To that extent it will be open for

           Mr. Dubey's client to approach the Civil Court and seek appropriate

           reliefs as available to them in law. It is clarified that this Court does

           not determine the extent of shares or relief of partition of shares or

           entitlement while issuing the grant. Requirement for issuance of grant

           is on the basis of purpose which is stated in the Petition but that does

           not ipso facto mean that this Court will give a declaratory relief to any

           of the legal heirs of the deceased with respect to the estate and

           property of the deceased. Grant is issued for administration of the

           properties and credits belonging to the deceased in accordance with

           law. Therefore this order has been passed since Mr. Dubey's clients are

           in occupation of the said premises. In that view of the matter they will

           be governed by the extant orders passed and the law in regard thereof.

           This order does not settle the entitlement of Mr. Dubey's client which

           shall be noted by all the parties.

           6.       In view of the above, Suit is disposed with liberty to the non-

           consenting legal heirs to approach the Civil Court and obtain

           appropriate declaratory reliefs in accordance with law.

           7.       Department is directed to proceed with the Petition and issuance

           of grant in accordance with law.



Amberkar
                     Digitally signed
                     by RAVINDRA
           RAVINDRA MOHAN
                                                  [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
           MOHAN    AMBERKAR
           AMBERKAR Date:
                     2026.02.27
                     17:37:50 +0530

                                                                                3 of 3