NON-REPORTABLE  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.6067 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP©No.1530 of 2007)

G.Gopal ….Appellant

Versus

C.Baskar & Ors.           … Respondents

O R D E R

1. Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order

dated 31st of July, 2006 passed by the Division Bench of

the  High Court  of  Madras  in OSA NO.219  of  2006 by

which  the  order  of  the  grant  of  revocation  of  probate

passed by the learned Single Judge of the original side of

the High Court in Application No.4122 of 2005 in T.O.S.

NO.32 of 1999 was confirmed.

4. We  have  heard  Mr.Thiayagarajan,  learned  counsel

appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mrs. R.Rajani,

1

learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

We have also examined the judgment under appeal  as

well as the materials on record. The only question that

was  agitated  before  us  by  Mr.Thiayagarajan,  learned

counsel  appearing  for  the  appellant  challenging  the

judgment of the High Court revoking the probate granted

in respect of the Will executed by the testator, was that

the  respondents  having  no  caveatable  interest  in  the

estate of the deceased, the application for revocation filed

by them could not be allowed. We are unable to accept

these  submissions  made  by  Mr.Thiayagarajan,  learned

counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant only for the

simple  reason  that  admittedly  the  respondents  were

grand children of the testator and they have claimed the

estate of the deceased on the basis of a settlement deed

executed  by the testator  himself  which admittedly  was

revoked by the testator. That being the position, we must

hold that the respondents had caveatable interest in the

estate of the testator and, therefore, they are entitled to

be  served  before  the  final  order  is  passed.   It  is  well

2

settled that if a person who has even a slight interest in

the  estate  of  the  testator  is  entitled  to  file  caveat  and

contest the grant of probate of the will of the testator.   

5. For the reasons aforesaid, we do not find any ground to

interfere  with  the  impugned  order  of  the  High  Court.

Mr.Thiayagarajan,  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the

appellant  submits,  on  instruction,  that  the  present

respondents shall be made parties in the proceeding for

grant of probate within a fortnight from this date. If such

an application of impleadment is filed, it is needless to

say that the same shall stand allowed and, in that case,

the  probate  proceedings as well  as the suit  being Suit

No.772 of 2005 filed in the original side of the Madras

High Court shall be clubbed together and dispose of at

an  early  date  preferably  within  four  months  from  the

date of communication of this order.  

6. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed of. There

shall be no order as to costs.  

………………………J.

3

[Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi;                      ……….…… ………….J. September 03, 2008.        [Aftab Alam]

4