Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute over the revocation of probate granted in 1995. Smt. Gouriprova Sen inherited properties from her husband and executed a Will on 9 July 1989, appointing her nephew, Dhiraj Dutta (the appellant), as sole executor and beneficiary. She died on 8 October 1989. The appellant obtained probate of the Will on 28 September 1995. In 2010-11, proceedings were initiated for mutation of revenue records. The respondents, Anirban Sen and others, who are nephews-in-law of the testatrix and the only surviving members of her husband's family, claimed they discovered the probate only in 2019. They filed a suit for declaration and injunction (Title Suit No. 60 of 2019) and later, on 5 July 2022, filed an application under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for revocation of the probate. The learned Single Judge dismissed the application as barred by limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963. On appeal, the Division Bench reversed the decision and allowed the revocation application. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court framed the issue of whether the application for revocation was within limitation. The Court noted that the respondents had no knowledge of the probate until 2019, and the application was filed within three years of acquiring such knowledge. The Court held that the limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for revocation of probate runs from the date of knowledge, not from the date of grant. The Court set aside the Division Bench's order and remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits, directing that the question of limitation be decided afresh in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Succession Law - Revocation of Probate - Limitation - Section 263 Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Article 137 Limitation Act, 1963 - The issue was whether an application for revocation of probate filed in 2022 was within limitation when the probate was granted in 1995. The Supreme Court held that the limitation period for revocation of probate under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from the date the applicant acquires knowledge of the probate, not from the date of grant. The respondents, who were nephews-in-law of the testatrix, had no knowledge of the probate until 2019, and thus their application filed in 2022 was within limitation. The Court set aside the order of the Division Bench which had allowed the revocation application, and remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits. (Paras 4-9) B) Limitation Act - Knowledge - Constructive Knowledge - Article 137 Limitation Act, 1963 - The Court distinguished between actual and constructive knowledge, holding that mere possibility of knowledge does not constitute constructive knowledge. The respondents, being nephews-in-law and not immediate family, could not be imputed with knowledge of the probate proceedings. The Court emphasized that the burden of proving knowledge lies on the party asserting limitation. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an application for revocation of probate filed under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 is barred by limitation when filed 27 years after the grant of probate, given that the applicants had no knowledge of the probate until 2019.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Division Bench, and remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits, directing that the question of limitation be decided afresh in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Limitation for revocation of probate runs from date of knowledge
- not date of grant
- Section 263 Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- Article 137 Limitation Act
- 1963
- constructive knowledge
- fraud
- suppression of facts
