The Hindu Business Line : Priyamvada's 1999 will illegal, says Birla counsel Jaitley

RESUMING arguments before Mr Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta of the Calcutta High Court today, opposing the petition of Mr R.S. Lodha seeking discharge of caveats filed by Mr K.K. Birla, Mr G.P. Birla, Mr B.K. Birla and Mr Y. Birla, Mr Arun Jaitley, counsel of Mr B.K. Birla, said that the will of Priyamvada Birla made on April 18, 1999 and the codicil of April 15, 2003, are both illegal and are not sustainable in law.

Mr Jaitley alleged that Mr R.S. Lodha acted fraudulently having full knowledge of the mutual will made in 1982, and thus set up a rival will in 1999 to frustrate the claim of the caveators; hence, the 1999 will cannot be accepted by the court of law.

In support of his argument, he said that M.P. Birla and Priyamvada Birla, pursuant to an agreement entered into between themselves made the mutual will of 1982, bequeathing the entire estate to public charity and philanthropic centres.

Mr Jaitley said that the law provides that pursuant to an agreement a mutual will, irrevocable in nature, is made after the death of one testator, and the second has no right to make any further will.

He said it was evident that Priyamvada Birla has taken benefit of her husband's will and by detracting from the main wishes of her demised husband, she has no right to transfer the property to any third party when the estate has been created by her. He relied upon the decisions of national and international courts on this score.

Mr Jaitley further alleged that Mr R.S. Lodha, being a chartered account of the M.P. Birla firm, took advantage of the ill-health of Priyamvada Birla and her moderate knowledge of English language, enabling him to practice fraud on both Priyamvada Birla and the Birla family as a whole by manufacturing the will of 1999 and codicil 2003.

Mr Jaitley disputed the argument of Mr R.S. Lodha's counsel, stating that there never was any bitterness between M.P. Birla and other Birla family members.

He said that when Mr K.K. Birla went abroad for a bypass operation, he was accompanied by Priyamvada Birla which shows the inter-personal relationship amongst the Birla family members; since Mr K.K. Birla and Mr B.K. Birla are the executors of the will made by M.P. Birla and Priyamvada Birla in 1982, they must have caveatable interest, by contesting the rival will of 1999 allegedly tutored by Mr R.S. Lodha, it was submitted.

Mr Jaitley further sighted a judgment where the Supreme Court of India held that if there is a mutual will and the beneficiary are the same, the estate duty shall be enough to get probate.

In this case, the 1982 will being a mutual will and beneficiaries are public trust, the executors of mutual will i.e. Mr K.K. Birla and Mr B.K. Birla must have caveatable interest in any parallel will. The hearing will continue.

More Stories on : Corporate Disputes | Courts/Legal Issues

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page