The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by Mewar princess Padmaja Kumari Parmar seeking letters of administration over the estate of her late father Arvind Singh Mewar. .Justice Subramonium Prasad ruled that Parmar’s suit was not maintainable and that all the contentions raised by her against the will produced by her brother, Lashyaraj Singh Mewar, can be raised in the testamentary case filed by him. Lakshyaraj Mewar has claimed that his father left the estate to him. “In the opinion of this Court, no cause of action subsists in TEST.CAS. 2/2026 [Padmaja Kumar Parmar’s case] after filing of Letters of Administration with Will. All the contentions raised in TEST.CAS. 2/2026 can be dealt with in TEST.CAS. 4/2026 [Lakshyaraj Mewar’s case], including the appointment of an interim administrator till the Will propounded by the Petitioner in TEST.CAS. 4/2026 is proved,” the Court observed. .The dispute between Padmaja Kumari Parmar and her brother Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar stems from a legal battle over the inheritance and control of properties belonging to their late father, a member of the erstwhile Mewar royal family of Udaipur.Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar has claimed that his father, Arvind Singh Mewar, left a will naming him as the only heir to his self-acquired properties.Padmaja Kumari has argued that no valid will exists. She argued that the will produced by her brother was executed when their father was of unsound mind and under undue influence. Both Lakshyaraj Singh and Padmaja Kumari filed testamentary cases before the High Court seeking letters of administration over their father’s properties. .The High Court today rejected Padmaja Kumari's case."The dispute regarding the validity of the said Will [produced by Lakshyaraj Singh, has thus assumed a contentious character within the meaning of Section 295 of the Indian Succession Act. Consequently, the statutory scheme contemplates that the issue of testamentary validity be adjudicated in the said proceedings, which are required to proceed in the nature of a civil suit. Permitting adjudication of the same issue in parallel proceedings founded on intestacy would run contrary to the legislative scheme and may result in inconsistent findings," the Court said.However, it granted her the liberty to raise all the objections in the case filed by her brother..Senior Advocates Arvind Nigam and Abhishek Malhotra, with advocates Anuradha Dutt, Chaitanya Kaushik, Suman Yadav, Kunal Dutt, Raghav Dutt,Avinash K Singh, Seema Mehta, Saurabh Pal, Vidhi Uppal, Kartikay Dutta and Anukriti Trivedi appeared for Padmaja Kumar Parmar. Senior Advocates Rajiv Nayar, Dayan Krishnan and Darpan Wadhwa with advocates C Rashmikant, Mahesh Agarwal, Rishi Agrawala, Rohan Dakshini, Varad Nath, Jay Sanklecha, Pratham Vir Agarwal, Anuja Bhansali, Urvi Gupte, Nilay Gupta, Rajat Sinha, Prabhav Bahuguna, Shreedhar Kale and Muskan Sethi represented Lakshyaraj Singh Mewar. Senior Advocates Sandeep Sethi and Arun Kathpalia with advocates Bani Brar, Shreya Sethi and Tahira Kathpalia represented Bhargavi Kumari..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
