2020 Supreme(Kar) 102

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.
Jagjeevan Prasad S/o Laxminarayana Prasad Shukla - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Parvati Bai W/o Late Manohar Prasad Shukla and Ors. – Respondents
M.F.A. No.200373 of 2016 (ISA)
Decided On : 03-02-2020

Headnote:

Evidence Act - Section 114 - Indian Succession Act - Section 263 - Movable and immovable properties – Acquisition of land - Whether respondent obtained an order of Probate fraudulently behind back of petitioners who are having a subsisting interest in case - Whether publication issued and published in newspaper had no wide circulation same is not a newspaper widely circulated in area - Whether order of probate was obtained in utter violation of principles of natural justice - Whether Probate of alleged granted in favor of Appellant vide Order passed by Trial Court is liable to be revoked - Whether impugned judgment and order passed by trial court warrants interference by this Court - Whether a person has sufficient interest is this Will grant displace any right to which he is otherwise entitled - Respondents filed a petition against appellant herein before trial court under Section 263 of Act inter-alia contending that they were wife and children of one who died intestate - It was contended that upon death of said respondents herein being his wife and children succeeded to his estate comprising of movable and immovable properties as his only heirs and legal representatives - It was contended that land measuring acres guntas owned by said was acquired by University of Agricultural Sciences to establish an Agriculture Research Station Gulbarga and per acre was awarded in his favor by way of compensation – Held, In order to prima-facie establish their relationship with respondents examined respondent No.1 as PW-1 and two witnesses as PWs 2 and 3 - Respondents also produced documentary evidence viz. photographs marriage records school records election id cards ration card family planning card tax paid receipts etc., in support of their contention - Trial court upon a correct and proper appreciation of said evidence on record has come to correct conclusion that respondents had prima facie established their relationship for limited purpose of establishing their locus standi to institute instant revocation /annulment proceedings - Upon re-appreciation of material on record and in light of limited scope of enquiry contemplated as regards prima facie relationship of respondents for purpose of locus standi court of considered opinion that trial court was fully justified in coming to correct conclusion that respondents had prima facie established that they were wife and children of deceased - In this context though it is vehemently contended on behalf of appellant that he has adduced substantial oral and documentary evidence to establish that not only was married to one who had predeceased him but also that respondents were not his wife and children court of view that in light of law laid down by Apex Court and this Court supra material on record clearly indicated that respondents had prima facie established their relationship which was sufficient to come to conclusion that respondents had locus standi to file instant revocation/annulment petition - Court have already held that Probate of alleged granted in favor of appellant vide Order passed by trial court deserves to be annulled/revoked under Section 263 of Indian Succession Act and petition filed by respondents deserves to be allowed - As noticed by court in Paragraph various reasons assigned by trial court to allow petition filed by respondents and thereby annul/revoke probate granted in favor of appellant are just sound and proper and same do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference - Upon re-appreciation of entire material on record and having regard to facts and circumstances narrated supra court of considered opinion that trial court was fully justified in annulling and revoking Probate granted in favor of Appellant vide Order passed - Impugned judgment and order passed by trial court is based on correct and proper consideration and appreciation of material on record and same is based on legal and acceptable evidence which does not warrant interference by this Court - By impugned judgment and order whereby trial court allowed petition thereby annulling and revoking probate granted in favor of appellant trial court has reserved liberty in favor of appellant to file a fresh petition for grant of probate - While dealing with Point Nos. 1 and 2 court have confirmed and affirmed impugned judgment and order passed by trial court - In addition to liberty already reserved by trial court in favor of appellant to institute fresh proceedings for grant of probate in order to do complete and substantial justice and to avoid unnecessary delay by starting proceedings afresh and to prevent multiplicity of proceedings court also deem it fit and proper to permit appellant herein to reopen by taking necessary steps in this regard before trial court which passed said - Upon such appropriate steps being taken by appellant by making suitable applications or otherwise appellant as well as trial court seized are directed to impaled respondents herein as party-respondents to said proceedings and give them sufficient opportunity to contest proceedings before proceeding further in matter - Trial court is also directed to notify and impaled such other parties as may be required in law and also give them sufficient opportunity to contest proceedings – Further trial court is also directed to dispose of proceedings de-novo/afresh strictly in accordance with law keeping in mind findings and observations recorded by court in this order as well as provisions of Indian Succession Act - It is needless to state that all rival contentions urged by appellant and respondents are kept open - Appeal is hereby dismissed