The legal standing of a landlord to file an eviction petition and the requirement of a succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, were central to the court's decision.

A. V. SRINIVASA REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner-tenant calls in question the validity and correctness of the order dated 6th February, 2003 passed by the XII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore in H. R. C. No. 1612 of 1997 allowing the eviction petition and directing the petitioner-tenant to vacate the petition premises.

( 2 ) THE respondent-landlord filed the petition pleading requirement of the premises for her own use. The petitioner was originally the tenant under the father of the landlord B. Shankaraiah. The petition premises was bequeathed by the said Shankaraiah in favour of the respondent. After the death of Shankaraiah the respondent became the owner of the premises by virtue of the Will executed by her father. In the eviction petition presented by her, it was pleaded that she was residing along with her husband and children in a rented premises by paying a rent of Rs. 3,080/- per month and that she has no other immovable property other than the petition premises and, therefore, she requires the premises for her own use and occupation and for the use and occupation of her family members.

( 3 ) DURING the pendency of the proceedings in the Court below the petitioner-tenant filed LA. No. 5 under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act read with Section 151 of the CPC praying that the Will be rejected because the respondent-landlord had not obtained a succession certificate in pursuance of the Will. The said LA. was rejected by the Court below. The petitioner challenged the said order rejecting the LA. No. 5, in H. R. R. P. No. 564 of 1999. This Court having dismissed the said revision petition, the Court below proceeded with the eviction proceedings treating the respondent as the landlord of the petition premises and passed the impugned order. The order passed by this Court in H. R. R. P. No. 564 of 1999 having become final, the question of existence of jural relationship of landlord and tenant has become a foregone conclusion and cannot be urged again by the petitioner in the present revision.

( 4 ) I have heard the learned Counsels on both sides.

( 5 ) MR. B. Subba Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, urged only one point viz. , that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief without obtaining the succession certificate which is essential as she got the schedule property from her late father under a Will. In this regard he has relied on the decision in Mrs. Hem Nolini Judah v Mrs. Isolyne Sarojbashini Bose wherein the Apex Court has held that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act of 1925 creates a bar to the establishment of any right under Will by an executor or a legatee unless probate or letters of administration of the Will have been obtained, whether that right is claimed by the person as plaintiff or defendant. The parties to the proceedings in which the Apex Court laid down the said ratio were Christians governed by the provisions of Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 under which it is mandatory for all Christian legatees to obtain probate or letter of administration before exercising the right of ownership over the property bequeathed in their favour. But, the parties to the present proceedings are Hindus who come under one of the exceptions carved out in Section 213 of the Act of 1925. Section 213 reads:"213. Right as executor or legatee when established. (1) No right as executor or legatee can be established in any Court of Justice, unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in India has granted probate of the will under which the right is claimed, or has granted letters of administration with the Will or with a copy of an authenticated copy of the Will annexed. (2) This section shall not apply in the case of Wills made by mohammedans, and shall only apply. (i) in the case of Wills made by any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina where such Wills are of the classes specified in clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57; and (ii) in the case of Wills made by any Parsi dying, after the commen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document