Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 110

37.4. Section 263-Revocation or annulment for just cause.-

Under section 263 the grant of probate or letters of administration may be revoked or annulled for just cause. The Explanation provides that just cause shall be deemed to exist where-

(a) the proceedings to obtain the grant were defective in substance; or

(b) the grant was obtained fraudulently by making a false suggestion or by concealing from the Court something material to the case; or

(c) the grant was obtained by means of an untrue allegation of a fact essential in point of law to justify the grant, though such allegation was made in ignorance or inadvertently; or

(d) the grant has become useless and inoperative through circumstances; or

(e) the person to whom the grant was made has wilfully and without reasonable cause omitted to exhibit an inventory or account in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of this Part, or has exhibited under that Chapter an inventory or account which is untrue in a material respect.

The following illustrations are appended:

(i) the Court by which the grant was made had no jurisdiction;

(ii) the grant was made without citing parties who ought to have been cited;

(iii) the will of which probate was obtained was forged or revoked;

(iv) A, obtained letters of administration to the estate of B, as his widow, but it has since transpired that she was never married to him;

(v) A has taken administration to the estate of B, as if he had died intestate, but a will has since been discovered;

(vi) since probate was granted, a later will has been discovered;

(vii) since probate was granted, a codicil has been discovered which revoked or adds to the appointment of executors under the will;

(viii) the person to whom probate was, or letters of administration were, granted, has subsequently become of unsound mind.

It may be stated with reference to the second illustration that the absence of citation on a person who1 was interested, being a transferee from the heirs at law, would be a defect of substance which is "just cause" within the meaning of section 263, Explanation.

The case may be different, where the parties themselves have led evidence.2-3

The section seems to need no change, as no serious difficulties have arisen in its application.

1. Banzvari Lal v. Kusum Bai, AIR 1973 MP 69 (70), para. 7.

2. Bal Govind v. Shri Ram, AIR 1947 All 372.

3. Anil Behari v. Latika Bala, AIR 1955 SC 566.

The Indian Succession Act, 1925 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
Powered and driven by Neosys Inc