Bombay high court appoints receiver on property of deceased man after mother alleges usurpation by daughter-in-law – Hindustan Times

The Bombay high court (HC) while holding that the mother has an equal right in the property of her son at par with the wife and children of the deceased son, recently appointed an interim receiver to take symbolic possession of the numerous properties in the name of the deceased man.

The HC appointed the receiver after it was informed that the deceased man’s wife and children had already alienated properties worth ₹1.85 crores and were neither responding nor appearing before the HC and the petitioner mother had an apprehension that her daughter-in-law would alienate her from the entire estate in her son’s name.

The HC also directed the issuance of an advertisement in an English and regional newspaper to ensure that the wife and children were sufficiently informed of the case.

The single-judge bench of justice Gautam Patel, while hearing the interim application in the testamentary petition of 80-year-old Premlatha Amin was informed by advocates Zubin Behramkamdin and Bahraiz Irani that the petitioner’s son Minil Kumar Amin had died intestate at Udipi in Karnataka in April 2021.

The advocates further informed the court that though the properties and estate of the deceased had to be shared between the mother, wife and son equally, the wife was trying to usurp the share of the octogenarian, hence the interim application was filed to restrain the wife from transferring the assets in the name of the deceased to her name.

The advocates also informed the bench that though the wife and son of the deceased had been informed of the case they had not appeared before the court, hence a Receiver should be appointed till the petition was decided.

According to the petition the deceased Minil was working as a brand manager of a company in Kuwait since the 1990’s and based on his earnings had bought substantial properties in Mumbai and outside. He was married and had a son who was studying in the US. The petition states that Minil and his wife had a strained relationship as a result of which Minil’s had contracted many ailments. Due to the ailments he retired from his job and returned to India in October 2020.

The petitions state that after his return, Minil’s wife did not allow the mother to meet or speak to him and finally in April 2021 when the mother came to know that her son’s health had deteriorated she took the help of her daughter and decided to go to Udipi. That is when Minil’s wife informed his brother that Minil had died. Thereafter, the mother had written to all the bank and housing societies where her son had bank accounts and properties informing them of Minil’s death and a request to not transfer anything in the name of the wife as a petition was pending in HC.

The advocates informed the bench that despite the letters, one of the banks had allowed the wife to transfer ₹1.85 crore to herself.

After hearing the submissions, the court observed that though the wife and son of the deceased had been informed of the case they had failed to be present through video conferencing and hence said, “I believe it will be necessary to take certain protective steps regarding the estate to ensure that it is preserved and, at the same time, to ensure that any case the Respondents may want to put forward is not prejudiced. But the one thing that is unacceptable is for the Respondents to defeat the Petitioner’s claim by remaining absent.”

The court while granting one more opportunity for the wife and son to appear appointed an ad-interim Receiver to take symbolic possession of the immovable and movable properties in Mumbai and also directed the mother to serve notice of the petition through advertisements in an English and a regional paper to the wife and son and posted hearing of the interim application and petition to October 20.