The Bombay High Court expressed concern over a society that preaches “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (the world is one family) globally, yet struggles with inheritance disputes at home. It urged minimizing prolonged property battles for society’s greater good.
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court expressed concern over the contradiction of a society that advocates for “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (the world is one family) on a global scale while facing familial disputes over inheritance.
It described ongoing property conflicts as classic examples of the gap between ancient values and contemporary realities, hoping that prolonged family legal battles will be minimized for the greater good of society.
A bench comprising Justices M S Sonak and Advait Sethna dismissed a petition from a daughter seeking a Letter of Administration concerning her late mother’s Will, which left family property in suburban Bandra to her and two of her brothers.
Two other brothers, excluded from the Will yet initially named as executors in their late father’s Will, contested their mother’s Will, alleging it was created under undue influence and collusion.
The court declined to issue the Letter of Administration, stating there were indeed suspicious circumstances related to the Will.
The high court remarked,
“The appellant (daughter), despite being the propounder of the Will, has not satisfied the conscience of this Court in dispelling the same, despite there being a legal obligation to do so,”
In its judgment, the HC noted that despite the widespread use of the phrase “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam,” meaning that the world is one family, disputes like this one highlight stark contrasts: family quarrels over property that seem unending and lead to delayed legal proceedings.
The court added,
“This is a tendency that ought to be curtailed in larger societal interest. We conclude with this solemn and optimistic hope,”
The case marks another family saga, with siblings contesting two Wills from their deceased parents.
The father had written a Will bequeathing his estate to his wife and two sons, while the mother later excluded those two sons in her Will, designating the other two sons as property owners.
According to the petition, the appellant’s parents married in 1933 and bore six children (five sons and one daughter).
The father passed away in 1976, leaving behind a Will that appointed his wife and two sons as executors and trustees. The mother died in 1987, bequeathing her property to her daughter and two sons. The two sons, excluded from the mother’s Will, argued that it lacked clarity and failed to explain their exclusion.
In her plea for the enforcement of her mother’s Will, the daughter claimed it was created without any fraud, collusion, or undue influence, asserting that no suspicious circumstances existed.
The high court noted that she never contested the probate of her father’s Will.