$~23

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Judgment delivered on: 19.07.2017

+ TEST. CAS. 83/2012 & I.A. No. 10748/2016 & 3331/2016

HARSH RALLI & ANR ..... Petitioners
versus

STATE & ORS ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioners : Mr. B.B. Gupta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. K.
Venkataraman, Adv.

For the Respondents : Ms. Zubeda Begum and Ms. Sana Ansari, Advs. for R-2 to 4
Ms. Ashima, Adv. for R-5 to 6.

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

JUDGMENT
19.07.2017
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

I.A. 7050/2017 (under Order IV Rule 17 of the CPC for

amendment of the petition)
1. By this application filed, the petitioner seeks conversion of the
Petition filed under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925
seeking grant of letter of administration with Will into a Suit for
declaration.

2. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have

TEST. CAS. 83/2012 Page 1 of 5

settled their disputes and entered into a Memorandum of Settlement
dated 27.05.2017 whereby the parties have agreed that the petitioner
would not pursue the Petition under Section 276 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925 seeking grant of letter of administration with
will but would seek conversion of the Petition into a Suit for
Declaration.

3. This Memorandum of Settlement, it is stated, has been entered

into for the purposes of restoring amicable relations between the
parties and for avoiding protracted and ruinous litigations between the
parties who are family members.

4. Reliance is placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on the

decision of the Division Bench of this court in ‘B.S. OBEROI VS. P.S.
OBEROI, 2013 (4) Apex Decision 616, wherein the Division Bench has
held that there is no bar to converting a Petition seeking grant of
Probate into a Civil Suit.

5. Reference is also drawn to judgment of a coordinate bench of

this court in ‘HARINDER SINGH KOCHAR VS. STATE & ORS.’ (2010)
173 DLT 365, wherein the reference received from Additional District
Judge was answered by a coordinate bench of this court to hold that a
Petition seeking probate of a Will could be treated as an ordinary civil
Suit with the consent of the parties. It was, however, clarified that in
the event of parties seeking a probate as one of the reliefs, the Court
would have to ensure that the formality of proving the Will is duly

TEST. CAS. 83/2012 Page 2 of 5

complied with.

6. Reliance is also placed on judgment dated 15.10.2015 in Test.

Cas. 54/2011 titled as ‘AMBICA MENGI VS. STATE & ORS’, wherein
another coordinate bench permitted conversion of the Petition seeking
a Probate into a regular Civil Suit. Subsequently the Testamentary
Case was registered as a Civil Suit and re-numbered as CS(OS)
3391/2015.

7. In the present case also the petitioner had originally sought

Letter of Administration with Will under Section 276 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925.

8. The parties are related to each other and are legal heirs are of a
common ancestor. The parties through the process of mediation have
settled their disputes and the Settlement Agreement dated 27.05.2017
has been signed by all the parties.

9. In view of the fact that parties have entered into a settlement to

resolve their disputes, it would be expedient to convert the Petition
seeking letter of administration with Will into Civil Suit. It is also to
be seen that since the parties are family members, settlement has been
arrived to restore cordial relationship between the family and it would
not serve any purpose in embroiling the parties into further litigation.
All the parties to the petition have agreed to this family settlement.

10. In view of the above, the application is allowed. The

TEST. CAS. 83/2012 Page 3 of 5

Testamentary petition is converted into a Suit. The amended plaint has
been filed along with the application. The same is taken on record.

11. Registry is directed to re-number the suit appropriately in

accordance with the High Court Rules.

CS(OS)___________ /2017 (to be numbered)

12. The parties have entered a settlement. The settlement

agreement dated 27.05.2017 has been filed in court. The plaintiff no. 1
and 2 and defendant nos. 5, 6 and 7 have filed their affidavits in
support of the settlement agreement dated 27.05.2017. The plaintiffs
as well as defendants all are present in court and are identified by their
respective counsels. They confirm the Memorandum of Settlement
dated 27.05.2017. The Memorandum of Settlement dated 27.05.2017
is exhibited as Exb. C - 1.

13. The parties who are present in court along with their counsels
confirm that in terms of the Memorandum of Settlement dated
27.05.2017, a gift of Rs. 22 lakhs is to be made by the plaintiffs to
defendant no. 4, 5 and 6 i.e. Smt. Neel Kamal Ralli, Sh. Amit Ralli
and Ms. Shilpi Ralli.

14. Defendants 4 to 6 have already received a sum of Rs. 1,33,333/-

each. Further sum of Rs. 6 lakhs each has been handed over to them in
court today. Defendants no. 4 to 6 acknowledge the receipt of total
sum of Rs. 22 lakhs as stipulated by the Memorandum of Settlement

TEST. CAS. 83/2012 Page 4 of 5

dated 27.05.2017 (Exb. C - 1).

15. Further the parties admit and acknowledge that the Will dated
02.02.2009 is the duly executed last Will of late Sh. Uggar Sain Ralli.
The defendants further consent that a decree of declaration be passed
in favour of the plaintiff in terms of prayer 'a' to the Plaint.

16. In view of the above, the suit is decreed in favour of the

plaintiff declaring that the plaintiffs are the sole and absolute owners
of the estates of late Sh. Uggar Sain Ralli including the immoveable
property bearing no. 173, Vivekanand Puri, Azad Marg, Delhi –
110007 and defendants have no right, title or interest in the estate of
late Sh. Uggar Sain Ralli.

17. Decree Sheet be prepared accordingly.

18. Since the Suit is a simplicitor Suit for Declaration without any
consequential relief being prayed for. The plaintiffs have already paid
the fixed court fees of Rs. 19.50 paisa on the plaint and the settlement
has been arrived at through the process of mediation. No further court
fees is liable to be paid on the plaint.

19. No costs.
20. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JULY 19, 2017
‘rs’

TEST. CAS. 83/2012 Page 5 of 5