In an application in a petition filed before the Delhi High Court to take on record the e-court fee of Rs. 5,69,981/- deposited by the applicant (executor) in compliance with orders dated 31-01-2014 and 10-08-2016 as well as to direct issuance of probate certificate in favour of the applicant as per the said orders, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan exempted the applicant from furnishing surety bonds and directed the issuance of the probate certificate.
The petition was filed by the applicant seeking probate of the last will and testament dated 29-08-1997 of his deceased father. By a judgment dated 31-01-2014, this Court granted a probate in favour of the applicant, who was also a named executor in the will, subject to him depositing the requisite court fee and upon furnishing the administration bond for due administration of the estate of the deceased. The applicant explained that by the present prayer, he sought exemption from furnishing two securities as demanded by the Court Registry by a letter dated 12-03-2026.
An objector (respondent 6) had preferred an appeal against the grant of probate, which came to be dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court. Thereafter, he challenged the same before the Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition, which was also dismissed.
The applicant submitted that the probate was granted in 2014 and had attained finality in 2015. It was asserted that he had also administered the estate of the deceased and that the same had been distributed amongst all the beneficiaries. Apart from the petitioner, his three real sisters were the beneficiaries, who had also given their affidavits after being satisfied with the due compliance of their father’s will, discharging the executor of his liabilities. Hence, the applicant sought exemption from furnishing the surety.
The Court noted that the administrative bond had been furnished by the applicant and that even the court fee as demanded by the Registry had been submitted. Reference was made to Arvind Nanda v. State (2020:DHC:1457) wherein the Court had considered the decision in Rajesh Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. Estate of late Raj Pal Sharma & Ors. (W.P.(C) 9108/2011) in which it was held that the imposition of a condition for furnishing security is the Court’s discretion and that the same is not mandatory.
Considering the present facts and the decision in Arvind Nanda (supra), the Court held that the applicant was entitled to be exempted from furnishing the surety bonds. Thus, while disposing of the application, the Court directed the Registry to issue the probate certificate to the petitioner if all other requirements were satisfied.
