The Bombay High Court on Tuesday framed issues regarding the will of late Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray with his estranged son Jaidev contending that his father was not of sound mind when he signed it.
Justice R D Dhanuka framed the issues after hearing advocates Rajesh Shah and Seema Sarnaik, the lawyers of Thackeray’s sons Uddhav (the current Sena president) and Jaidev, respectively.
Both the brothers will now give their versions through the documents and reply to the issues framed by the court.
While Uddhav and other members of Thackeray family are beneficiaries under the will, Jaidev gets nothing from it.
The first issue framed by the high court is whether the will, dated December 13, 2011, was executed and attested by Thackeray.
The second issue is “whether the deceased was of sound and disposable mind at the time of executing the will” as Jaidev’s lawyer today contended that it was not so.
Jaidev’s counsel also alleged that Uddhav misled his father, which led to he (Uddhav) being bequeathed most of the property.
Following the allegation, the court framed another issue, “Whether plaintiff no 3 (Uddhav) has played fraud and exercised undue influence on the deceased.”
Justice Dhanuka also remarked that if the fraud is proved, the consequences will follow.
The last issue is “whether Uddhav is entitled to probate (court’s certificate about validity) of the will”.
Both lawyers submitted that relevant documents will be submitted to the court this week. The court adjourned the matter for admissibility of documents on August 25.
Jaidev had earlier filed a caveat in the high court which was hearing the probate petition filed by Uddhav. Jaidev urged that he may be heard in the matter.
The high court had, however, rejected Jaidev’s demand that the beneficiaries of his father’s will be restrained from selling off the properties while the case was pending.
The Sena patriarch passed away on November 17, 2012.
The probate petition of Uddhav, filed in January 2013, was converted into ‘a testamentary suit’ as it was opposed by Jaidev who has not got any share in the property.
—PTI