A probate court cannot adjudicate title to property devised under a will.

The plaintiff petitioned under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for probate of a Will dated 22 October 2001, by which Smt. Gangamma allegedly bequeathed the suit property to him.

After the defendant contested the petition, it was converted into a suit under Section 295 and numbered O.S. No. 11308/2006.

The trial court granted probate and also declared the plaintiff the absolute owner of the property.

The defendant appealed under Section 299, challenging the declaration of title

1. Whether a court hearing a contentious proceeding under Sections 276 and 295 of the Indian Succession Act may declare the plaintiff owner of, and title-holder to, the property covered by the Will

2. Whether the trial court’s order required appellate interference

Sections 276 and 295 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, govern petitions for probate and the procedure in contentious probate matters; under Section 295, a contested proceeding takes, “as nearly as may be,” the form of a regular suit, but remains confined to the probate inquiry.

The court applied the principle in Ishwardeo Narain Singh v. Kamta Devi that a probate court determines whether the Will was duly executed and attested and whether the testator had a sound disposing mind—not whether a particular bequest is valid or who owns the property.

It also relied on the authorities discussed in Smt. Severine D’Souza v. Felix Ambrose D’Souza and Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka v. Jasjit Singh: probate establishes the factum and valid execution of the Will and the legal character of the executor, but does not determine title to, or the existence of, the property.

Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, concerns the civil courts’ jurisdiction over civil suits, but does not enlarge the scope of a probate proceeding.

Although Section 295 requires a contested probate proceeding to take the form of a regular suit as nearly as possible, the court held that conversion does not expand the probate court’s substantive jurisdiction beyond deciding the Will’s validity and the entitlement to probate.

The trial court therefore exceeded that jurisdiction by declaring the plaintiff the absolute owner of the property.

The probate grant could stand, but it did not resolve any rival claim of title; such claims must be determined in appropriate proceedings.

It set aside the decree declaring the plaintiff the absolute owner and title-holder, while confirming the grant of probate of the Will dated 22 October 2001.

It reserved liberty to both parties to pursue their respective claims concerning title and possession in appropriate proceedings in accordance with law