Succession–ProbateProceeding–Compromise between Parties: Succession Act, 1925.

The appeal u/s. 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 had been filed against the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Nimbahera dated 17-04-1998, whereby the application filed by the respondents No. 1 and 2 u/s. 276 of the Act was allowed and a probate of will executed by deceased Bheru Lal dated 06-04-1992 was ordered to be granted to them. Brief facts of the case are that Smt. Mangi Bai and Smt. Suhagi Bai, both daughters of Shri Veni Ram filed application u/s. 276 of the Act seeking probate of registered will dated 06-04-1992 executed by their brother Bheru Lal, who died on 01-02-1993. It was stated in the application that they were real sisters of deceased Bheru Lal, who died issueless and had no wife and to take care of the fact that there is no dispute in the future, the said will was executed by the deceased Bheru Lal in their favour. It was further indicated that the appellant herein who was impleaded as defendant in the said application had got the land, which was bequeathed under the will to them, mutated in her favour by claiming herself to be the wife of deceased Bheru Lal and the said land was acquired for construction of Mansarovar Dam and award in this regard was passed, which was sought to be received by the appellant herein. Ultimately, it was prayed that probate of the said will be issued in their favour.

However, during the pendency of the said proceedings on 07-04-1998, a compromise dated 31-3- 1998 in the form of application under Order XXIII, Rule 3 CPC was filed by the appellant as well as respondents No. 1 and 2.

It was held that there is no bar in entering into compromise in probate proceedings. It is open for parties in contested probate proceedings to settle their disputes by way of compromise-Refusal to pass decree in terms of compromise entered into amongst parties to proceedings despite filing of application under O.23, R.3 was improper.