Case Note & Summary
The judgment involves a dispute over the administration of the estate of late Rajnikant Ambalal Kilachand, where the Respondent, under a Will dated 27 March 1997 -- The Applicant a beneficiary and legal heir, filed an application under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, seeking removal of the Respondent due to gross misconduct and failure to administer the estate -- The Court reviewed the procedural history, including previous applications and orders, and found that the Respondent had consistently delayed estate distribution despite court directives -- In its decision, the Court removed the Respondent as Executor and appointed the Applicant in his place, citing breach of fiduciary duty and non-compliance with testamentary intent -- The judgment underscores the Executor's legal obligations and the court's authority to intervene in cases of mismanagement
Headnote
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, in its Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction, adjudicated an Interim Applications -- The Applicant, sought removal of the Respondent, as Executor under the Will of late Rajnikant Ambalal Kilachand -- The Court held that an Executor acts as a fiduciary and must administer the estate promptly, with any undue delay constituting a breach of duty under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Succession Act) -- The Respondent had failed to comply with previous court orders and timelines for estate distribution, leading to his removal and replacement with the Applicant -- The decision emphasized the Executor's obligation to fulfill the Testator's intent without personal discretion
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: The Issue of removal of an Executor for failure to administer the estate under Section 301 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The Court allowed the Interim Application, removed the Respondent as Executor, and appointed the Applicant as the new Executor to administer the estate
