Bombay High Court

FATIMA SHAFIQUE KHAN AND ANRversusTAHERALI AKABARALI MADARWALA AND ORS

Decided: 8 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The order allowing the Chamber Summons stands, and the writ petition is dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner Fatima Shafique Khan challenged a City Civil Court order that allowed a Chamber Summons to represent the deceased in L.C. Suit No. 2960 of 2014. The petitioner argued that the respondents had made contradictory statements in their affidavit and that the court incorrectly recorded that the respondents had filed a petition for grant of Letters of Administration. The High Court examined the pleadings and noted that the grant of Letters of Administration is not a condition precedent for representing the estate, citing the distinction between Sections 211 and 213 of the Indian Succession Act. It held that a summary inquiry is appropriate at the stage of putting legal representatives on record when no other claimant exists. Consequently, the Court found no ground to interfere with the lower court’s order and dismissed the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether a Chamber Summons can be issued to represent the estate of a deceased without a grant of Letters of Administration.
Whether the lower court erred in recording that the respondents had filed a petition for Letters of Administration.
Whether the contradictory statements in the respondents' affidavit warrant setting aside the order allowing the Chamber Summons.

Legislation cited

Indian Succession Act — s. 211, 213

Subjects

Letters of Administration
Chamber Summons
Indian Succession Act
Estate representation
Summary inquiry
Civil Procedure

Judgment

                                                                                     32. WP.11301.2026.doc

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 11301 OF 2026

                   Fatima Shafique Khan                                          ...Petitioner
                         Versus
                   Taherali Akabarali Madarwala & Ors                            ...Respondents

                   Mr. Sanjeev Singh a/w. Shivam Joshi, S. Mishra, Ankit Mishra i/b. Mr. Ritesh Singh
                   for the Petitioner.


                                                      CORAM           : N. J. JAMADAR, J.

                                                      DATE            : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                   P.C.

                   1.     Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

                   2.     Challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 20/07/2026 passed by the learned

                   Judge, City Civil Court whereby a Chamber Summons taken out to represent the

                   deceased and prosecute the L.C. Suit No. 2960 of 2014 came to be allowed.

SAINATH            3.     Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that Respondents/Applicants had
SANJAY
BODKHE
                   made contradictory statements in the affidavit-in-support of the Chamber Summons.
Digitally signed
by SAINATH
SANJAY BODKHE
Date: 2026.09.11
21:47:55 +0530     Though a reference was made to the fact that the Respondents were in the process of

                   obtaining the Letters of Administration, yet particulars of the said Petition were not

                   furnished. Learned Judge has incorrectly recorded that Respondents had filed a

                   Petition for grant of Letters of Administration.

                   4.     I have perused the averments in the plaint.



                   Akn                                       1
                                                                  32. WP.11301.2026.doc

5.     The deceased Plaintiff has assailed the legality and validity of instruments

executed by the grandfather of the deceased Plaintiff in favour of the Defendants. The

grant of Letters of Administration is not a condition precedent for representing the

estate of the deceased.    There is an essential distinction between the provisions

contained in Section 211 and 213 of Indian Succession Act. The learned Judge, City

Civil Court has correctly observed that at the stage of bringing the legal

representatives of deceased Plaintiff on record a summary inquiry is warranted,

especially when there is no other person who has laid claim to represent the estate of

the deceased Plaintiff.

6.     In the aforesaid view of the matter, there is no reason to interfere with the

impugned order. The Petition thus does not deserve to be entertained and, accordingly,

stands dismissed.




                                                      ( N. J. JAMADAR, J. )




Akn                                      2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…