Clark v Sharma

[2024] NZHC 1434

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2024-404-1045

[2024] NZHC 1434

UNDER

part 19 of the High Court Rules 2016 and section 53 of the Administration Act 1969.

IN THE MATTER

of the Estate of Ann Sharma Hobart, Tasmania, Australia – deceased.

BETWEEN

MELISSA CLARK as Executor of the Estate of Ann Sharma

Applicant

AND

NAVEEN SHARMA

First Respondent

MAXINE HERMAN
Second Respondent

MAXINE HERMAN and MAUREEN

MERRICK Applicants to be appointed as Administrators of the Estate of Thomas Osborne Herman

Third Respondents

Hearing:	22 May 2024
Appearances:	T Milne for the Applicant
Judgment:	31 May 2024

JUDGMENT OF WHATA J

Solicitors:

Martelli McKegg, Auckland

CLARK v SHARMA [2024] NZHC 1434 [31 May 2024]

[1]                 This came before me on the Duty Judge list. I indicated my satisfaction with making the order sought for the reasons detailed in the supporting memorandum and affidavits. Clarification was however needed for the purposes of making any final orders. That clarification has been provided. This is my judgment granting the orders sought.

[2]                 The Applicant seeks directions from the Court regarding the distribution of the estate of Ann Sharma.

[3]                 Ann Sharma died in Hobart, Tasmania, Australia during April 2023. Probate of the will was granted on 5 July 2023, appointing Melissa Clark as executor of her estate. As Ms Clark explains in her affidavit, the Will sets out that the residue of the estate is to be divided into 11 equal parts, and eight of those parts will go to Ann’s “late husband’s” nephew, Naveen Sharma.

[4]                 At that time, Ms Clark had limited information on who Naveen Sharma was or how she could get in contact with him. She then took various steps to find him, including reaching out to a Fijian law firm, Munro Leys. Munro Leys agreed to assist in finding Mr Sharma. Among other findings they published a public notice in the Fiji Times. Ultimately, they identified a person named Mr Nisheet Navin as Naveen Sharma. Ms Clark then gathered evidence to support Naveen’s relationship to the late husband of Ann.

[5]                 Having read Ms Clark’s affidavit I am satisfied that she has properly located the intended beneficiary of the Will and there should be orders as sought by her for the purposes of distribution. Helpfully counsel for the applicant has filed a memorandum specifying the directions sought, namely that she may distribute eight of the 11 equal parts of the residuary of the estate to the person identified in the supporting affidavit as being Naveen Sharma.

[6]                 For completeness, Ms Maureen Merrick is removed as a respondent to this proceeding. To the extent necessary, the applicant shall have her reasonable costs out of the estate.

[7]Orders accordingly.

Whata J