MR. JOSEPH MARIO PETER LOBO v. KARNATAKA STATE MEDI

(BY SRI. ANN MARY GREEN AND SMT.KALADEVI JAMEEMA ADVOCATES) …PETITIONERS Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

#1. NIL …RESPONDENT THIS PROBATE CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 270, 273 AND 276 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT 1925, PRAYING TO PROVE THE SAID WILL DATED 2ND OCTOBER 1994 IN COMMON FORM AND THAT PROBATE THEREOF TO HAVE EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE UNION OF INDIA. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER

#1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and no respondent in the matter. This petition is filed under Sections 270, 273 and 276 of the Indian Succession Act praying this Court to grant the probate in respect of the Will dated 2nd October 1994.

#2. The factual matrix of case of the petitioner is that Joseph Mario Peter Lobo also known as J.M.P.Lobo who is the 1st petitioner is a practicing Advocate and 2nd petitioner is retired Medical representative. It is contended that Lira Maria Lobo also known as Lyra Lobo referred to as the deceased was a Christian and died on 17.09.1997, the death certificate is also produced. It is contended that deceased had executed a last Will in the presence of witnesses and the same is in respect of assets which are likely to come to their hands of the petitioner and as such, executors does not exceed in the aggregate sum of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR Rs.1,37,81,321/- and at the time of executing the last Will, the testator was having sound state of mind. The petitioners also undertaken to duly administer the property and credits of the said Lira Maria Lobo also known as Lyra Lobo and also undertakes to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same in this Court within 6 months from the date of grant of probate and also render the true account within a period of 1 year.

#3. The counsel appearing for the petitioner would submits that the Will is marked as Ex.P.1 and also produced death certificate of the testator as Ex.P.2 and taken the citation in terms of Ex.P.3 and P4 and none appeared and objected the same. The counsel also would contend that in order to prove the execution of the Will, examined two witnesses as P.W.2 and P.W.3 and they are having acquaintance with the signature of the attesting witnesses Nos.1 and 2 since both the attesting witnesses are no more and hence complied with Section 69 of the Evidence Act by identifying the signature and having - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR acquaintance with the signature of the attesting witnesses i.e., sister of second attesting witness and daughter of first attesting witness. The counsel also brought to notice of this Court 1st petitioner is examined as P.W.1 and also identifies the signature of the mother as Ex.P.1(a) to P1(d) and even identifies the signature of witnesses as *Ex.P.1(e) and *Ex.P.1(f) and also produced the death certificate and hence, the very execution of Will is proved and hence, counsel prays for granting of probate.

#4. Having heard the appellant’s counsel and also on perusal of material available on record, the point that would arise for consideration of this Court are: 1) Whether the petitioners have made out the ground to grant the probate as sought in the petition? 2) What Order?

#5. Having perused the petition averments, it is clear that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the children of the testator and both them have been nominated as executors * Corrected vide Chamber Order dated 25.07.2025 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR of the said Will and also the assets is valued as Rs.1,37,81,321/- and also both of them have undertaken to pay the maximum Court fee and apart from that undertaken to act as executors and comply with terms and directions of the Will that is marked as Ex.P.1 and in paragraph No.7, both the petitioners undertook to duly administer the property and credits of the said Lira Maria Lobo also known as Lyra Lobo and also undertaken to make full and true inventory and also to exhibit the same before the Court and also render the true account and to that effect also filed affidavit by the first petitioner and also produced the death certificate of the testator i.e., Ex.P.2. The records also discloses that paper publication was taken in terms of Ex.P.3 and Ex.P.4 and none appeared and objected the same and also having perused the material on record, examined two witnesses P.W.2 and P.W.3 and they are the sister and daughter of respective attesting witnesses and those two witnesses have been examined for the reason that original attesting witnesses - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR are no more and having considered the same, Section 69 of Evidence Act is also complied, since both of them identifies the signature of attesting witnesses on oath and having taken note of said fact into consideration as well as the material available on record, the petitioners have proved the very execution of Will. Hence, they are entitled for probate as sought and hence I answer the point No.1 as affirmative.

#6. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: i) ii) ORDER The Petition is allowed. The probate is granted as sought and directed to pay the stamp duty as undertaken and also directed to submit full and true inventory within 6 months from the date of granting of this probate. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:27745 PROB.CP No. 16 of 2023 HC-KAR iii) The petitioners are also directed to render the true account of the said property and credits within 1 year from the date of granting of this probate. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74