(Prayer: That he may be permitted to prove the Will dated 14.06.2024 in common form and that the Probate thereof to have effect limited to the State of TamilNadu may be granted to him. Gross amount of Rs.5,90,00,000/- and Net amount of Rs.5,89,50,000/- Suc.duty of Rs.25,000/- paid on 22.07.2025 by e-C/F D.No.28376/2025.)

1. This Original Petition has been filed under Sections 222 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 read with Order XXV Rule 4 of the Original Side Rules, seeking grant of probate of the last Will and Testament dated 14.06.2024 said to have been executed by late Mrs. Gyanlatha, to have effect limited to the State of Tamil Nadu.

2. The petitioner is Vimal Kumar Srisrimal. He claims to be the executor named under the Will dated 14.06.2024. The deceased Mrs. Gyanlatha was permanently residing at No.203, East Coast Main Road, Injambakkam, Chennai – 600 115. She died on 08.01.2025 at No.473, Kilpauk Garden Road, Sreshta Apartments, C-12, 2nd Floor, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the deceased and her husband late Mr. Parasmal Jain had no issues. Her husband predeceased her on 11.08.1986. The property covered under the Will is the immovable property bearing Plot No.X, Door No.21, Race Course Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032, measuring 15,194 sq.ft., comprised in R.S.No.84/1A and 85/1A in Block No.2 of Velachery Village, Mambalam Taluk, Chennai District.

4. According to the petitioner, the larger extent of the property originally belonged to Mrs. Sajjan Bai, the mother-in-law of the deceased. Thereafter, Mrs. Sajjan Bai released the property in favour of her son Mr. Parasmal Jain, husband of the deceased, under release deed dated 15.04.1974 registered as Document No.2913 of 1974. After the death of Mr. Parasmal Jain, the deceased Mrs. Gyanlatha inherited the property as his wife and legal heir. The deceased later divided the larger extent into Plot Nos.X, Y and Z. Plot Nos.Y and Z were sold under sale deeds dated 06.02.2009, registered as Document Nos.492 of 2009 and 493 of 2009, and the deceased retained Plot No.X measuring 15,194 sq.ft.

5. It is further stated that the deceased executed the Will dated 14.06.2024 in the presence of two attesting witnesses, namely Shankarlal Devendra and P. Rajesh Kumar Jain. Under the Will, the deceased bequeathed the Schedule- A immovable property and the movable assets/bank deposits in favour of respondents 1 to 3, namely Sunil Kumar, Anil Kumar and Dinesh Kumar, equally. The petitioner has been appointed as executor under the Will.

6. Respondents 1 to 3 are stated to be the sons of late Rishab Chand Jain, who was the brother of the deceased’s husband late Parasmal Jain. Respondent 4, Renubala, is the daughter of late Rishab Chand Jain. Respondent 5, Saroja, is shown as the wife of Rajesh Kumar, the predeceased son of late Rishab Chand Jain. The petitioner has arrayed the said persons as respondents in the Original Petition.

7. The Will states that the Schedule-A property will devolve on respondents 1 to 3 equally, and that the bank deposits and movable articles are also bequeathed in their favour after meeting funeral expenses and last rites. Respondent 4 and 5 was arrayed as persons with possible caveatable interest.

8. Notice was taken to the respondents. Insofar as the second respondent is concerned, private notice was served and affidavit of service has been filed. Insofar as the fifth respondent is concerned, A.No.5408 of 2025 was allowed on 04.11.2025 permitting substituted service by paper publication. Pursuant thereto, paper publication was effected in Tamil daily “Makkal Kural” dated 22.11.2025 and affidavit of service has been filed. No caveat or objection is available on record.

9. Collector’s notice has also been issued as contemplated under the Original Side Rules. The gross value of the estate is stated as Rs.5,90,00,000/- and the net value is stated as Rs.5,89,50,000/-. Succession duty of Rs.25,000/- has been paid.

10. Before the learned Master, the petitioner examined himself as P.W.1 and marked Exs.P1 to P10. Ex.P1 is the original unregistered Will dated 14.06.2024 executed by Mrs. Gyanlatha. Ex.P2 is the certified copy of the sale deed dated 26.03.1968. Ex.P3 is the death certificate of Mr. Rishab Chand Jain. Ex.P4 is the death certificate of Mr. Parasmal Jain. Ex.P5 is the legal heirship certificate of Mr. Parasmal Jain. Ex.P6 is the legal heirship certificate of Mr. Rishab Chand Jain. Ex.P7 is the extract from the Permanent Land Register dated 26.07.2016. Ex.P8 is the death certificate of Mrs. Gyanlatha. Ex.P9 is the affidavit of assets showing the net value of the estate as Rs.5,89,50,000/-. Ex.P10 is the certificate under Section 63(4)(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, for the electronic documents.

11. P. Rajesh Kumar Jain, one of the attesting witnesses to Ex.P1 Will, was examined as P.W.2. He has stated that he knew the deceased Mrs. Gyanlatha for about 10 to 15 years, that the deceased executed Ex.P1 Will on 14.06.2024 in his presence and in the presence of the other attesting witness Shankarlal Devendra, and that the deceased was in a sound state of mind and in good health at the time of execution of the Will. He has further stated that the testatrix signed Ex.P1 Will in the presence of both attesting witnesses and that both witnesses signed the Will at the same time at Sri Shista Apartment, Kilpauk. His Aadhaar card was marked as Ex.P11.

12. Thus, the execution and attestation of the Will have been proved through the evidence of P.W.2, one of the attesting witnesses. The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 remains uncontroverted. There is no caveat or objection opposing the grant of probate.

13. Earlier, by order dated 21.04.2026, this Court directed the petitioner to clarify certain aspects relating to the complete family particulars of the deceased and her husband, the persons having possible caveatable interest, the exact relationship of the petitioner with the deceased and the valuation/deduction claimed in the affidavit of assets.

14. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit dated 09.06.2026. In the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner has clarified that the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, namely Devaraj Jain and Sajjan Bai, had two sons, namely Parasmal Jain and Rishab Chand Jain. Parasmal Jain was the husband of the deceased Gyanlatha and they had no issues. Rishab Chand Jain and his wife Premalatha had five children, namely Sunil Kumar, Anil Kumar, Dinesh Kumar, Renubala and Rajesh. Rajesh is stated to have died and his wife Saroja has been shown as the fifth respondent. The petitioner has further stated that respondents 1 to 5 are the persons having caveatable interest and that no other person has caveatable interest.

15. The petitioner has also clarified that though he has been described as brother-in-law of the deceased in the Will, he is not a member of the family of Devaraj Jain. His father is Shankarlal Srisrimal. He is only a distant relative of the deceased. His wife Leela is alive and is not related to the testatrix in any manner. The said clarification sufficiently answers the query raised by this Court regarding the relationship of the petitioner and the persons having caveatable interest.

16. On considering the pleadings, oral evidence and documentary evidence, this Court is satisfied that the Will dated 14.06.2024 executed by late Mrs. Gyanlatha has been duly proved in the manner known to law. The petitioner is the executor named in the Will. There is no caveat or objection. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to probate.

17. Accordingly, this Original Petition is allowed. Probate of the Will dated 14.06.2024 executed by late Mrs. Gyanlatha shall be granted in favour of the petitioner, Vimal Kumar Srisrimal, to have effect limited to the State of Tamil Nadu.