In a powerful observation that contrasted the ancient Indian ideal of universal kinship with the harsh reality of protracted family battles, the Bombay High Court recently dismissed a plea in a property dispute that had been festering for over four decades. The bench lamented that while the maxim "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" (the world is one family) is often invoked, families themselves remain locked in seemingly endless conflicts.
A Legacy of Litigation: The Bandra Property Dispute
The case revolved around a residential property in Bandra, Mumbai, and the inheritance claims following the deaths of parents Sonny Rita Coelho and Maria Francisca Coelho. The legal saga began with Sonny Coelho's will from August 1971, which granted his wife Maria a life interest in the property, with ultimate ownership destined for their sons Victor and Neville. This will was probated by the Bombay High Court in April 1980 without challenge from any of the six children.
However, the plot thickened when Maria Coelho executed her own will in July 1982. This document bequeathed all her assets, including the disputed property, to only three of her children: Myra Philomena Collaco, George, and Reginald, explicitly excluding Victor and Neville. After Maria's death in November 1985, Myra sought letters of administration based on this will.
Victor, and later his widow and children, opposed this move, questioning the will's validity and Myra's role in its execution. This opposition transformed the matter into a contested testamentary suit. A single judge, on March 7, 2003, found that Maria had the mental capacity to make the will and that it was formally proved. Yet, the judge refused to grant the letters of administration, citing unexplained suspicious circumstances surrounding the will's execution.
Court's Stern Observations on Family Discord
A division bench comprising Justices M S Sonak and Advait M Sethna, hearing the matter on December 30, expressed deep concern over the nature of such disputes. The court noted that battles over succession and inheritance are increasingly fragmenting families, eroding trust among close relatives, and consuming a disproportionate amount of precious judicial time.
"In contemporary times, we often hear the famous phrase 'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam', meaning that the world is one family. However, cases such as the present one are classic examples of stark differences: disputes within families over property that show no end in sight and ultimately result in delayed litigation," the bench remarked.
The judges emphasized that inheritance battles often turn siblings, parents, and extended family into legal adversaries, reducing intimate bonds to cold contests over shares and technicalities. While courts are duty-bound to adjudicate legal rights, they cannot mend relationships broken by years of bitterness.
A Plea for Mediation Over Litigation
Dismissing the appeal and refusing to interfere with the single judge's verdict due to a lack of infirmities, the High Court stressed the need for a more sensitive approach. The bench advocated for a conciliatory path over immediate adversarial litigation in family disputes.
Stressing the critical importance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), the court strongly encouraged parties entangled in family property conflicts to explore mediation and settlement at the earliest stage. It observed that many such conflicts could be resolved through dialogue, mutual understanding, and compromise, thereby preserving familial relationships and alleviating the burden on an overstretched judiciary.
The court highlighted a tragic pattern where litigation drags on for decades, often continuing even after the original disputants have passed away, leaving the next generation to inherit the acrimony. Concluding with a solemn hope, the bench stated that the justice system should be the forum of last resort in family matters, not the first stop. "This is a tendency that ought to be curtailed in larger societal interest," the court said.
