'Person Claiming Adverse Interest Cannot Oppose Will': Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Impleadment Of Tenant In Probate Case

The Karnataka High Court has held that a person who claims a right against the Testator's interests cannot be allowed to come on record to oppose the Will, and such a person also cannot be considered to have a caveatable interest.

Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty made this observation while allowing a petition filed by Meera M.R., and setting aside the trial court's order dated 11.12.2023, which had permitted Gangadhara to be impleaded in the proceedings.

Meera had filed a petition seeking a Letter of Administration for the Will executed by the Testator, Smt. Jayamma, on 19.02.2007. Paper publication was issued and, since no objections were filed, the Trial Court proceeded to record evidence for the petitioner. Arguments were heard and the matter was posted for orders.

At that stage, Gangadhara filed IA No.2 under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC, seeking to be added as a respondent. The Trial Court allowed this application.

Meera argued that the respondent only claims to be a tenant of the property covered under the Will executed in her favour. He has no right of inheritance, and therefore the Trial Court was wrong in allowing him to be impleaded.

On the other hand, the respondent contended that his application before the Land Tribunal under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, seeking occupancy rights over the land, is still pending. He claimed that if Meera's petition in P & SC No.24/2021 is allowed, she may alienate the property.

The High Court noted that Item No.2 of the petition schedule property was allotted to Jayamma under a partition decree in OS No.253/1998, and she had executed the Will in favour of Meera on 19.02.2007.

It also noted that Jayamma had opposed the respondent's claim for occupancy rights, and during the pendency of WP No.37253/2016 before the High Court, Jayamma passed away. Considering the Will, Meera was permitted to come on record as Jayamma's legal representative.

The Court emphasised:

“It is not the case of the respondent that he is an heir under succession who would be otherwise benefited if the Will were to be invalidated. A caveator or objector in a probate proceeding should be able to demonstrate that the claim made for grant of probate prejudices his right because it defeats some other line of succession… over the property which is the subject matter of the Will.”

The Court further explained that a person can object to a probate proceeding only if granting probate would defeat their claim of succession or inheritance, even if that interest is small:

“Whether the grant of probate or letter of administration would prejudice the right of the caveator/objector… would be a parameter to consider whether the caveator/objector is a party who is required to be heard.”

In this case, the respondent does not dispute that he is neither related to Jayamma nor entitled to inherit the property. His only claim is that he has filed Form No.7A for occupancy rights.

Therefore, the Court held:

“I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was not justified in allowing the impleading application filed by the respondent.”

Appearance: Advocate Krishna Murthy T R for Petitioner.

Advocates Mahesh S B, Varadaraj P N, for Respondent.

Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 363

Case Title: Meera M R AND Gangadhara

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 8205 OF 2024.

Click Here To Read/Download Order