ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 09-11-2016, passed in Letter of Administration, Case No. 38 of 2005, passed by learned Ad hoc, Additional District Judge- I, Banka (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Court below’), whereby the learned Court below has disposed of the application of the appellants filed for issuance of Letter of Administration with respect to the Bank locker of deceased Lakhan Lal Singh with an observation that applicants-appellants are liberty to file petition under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for brevity ‘the Act’).

3. A petition under Section 278 of the Act for grant of Letter of Administration in respect of locker bearing No. 12B in State Bank of India, Bhagalpur, City Branch, (for brevity ‘the Bank’) in the name of late Lakhan Lal Singh has been filed.

4. In brief, the fact as stated, that deceased Lakhan Lal Singh, who was father of appellant nos. 1 to 4 and father-in-law of respondent no. 2 and grandfather of respondent nos. 3 and 4, died on 04-06-2000 at village- Kasba, PS Sambhuganj, District Banka. The appellants as well as respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are the only alive relatives of the deceased Lakhan Lal Singh and there is no other legal heir of the deceased.

5. It is stated that since the deceased has not left behind any Will in respect of his assets, movable and immovable property, the appellants as well as respondent Nos. 2, 3, and 4 are Class- I heirs and successors of late Lakhan Lal Singh. Respondent No. 1, namely, Amit Kumar Singh is the maternal grandson of late Lakhan Lal Singh. It is further pleaded that the deceased Lakhan Lal Singh could not disclose regarding the contents of the said locker and has also not left behind any paper to the knowledge and information of the appellants regarding the contents of the locker, and as such, contents of the locker has tentatively described in the plaint/application. It is further submitted that appellant nos. 1 to 4 and respondent nos. 1 to 4 had given consent and had no objection for the grant of Letter of Administration only in the name of Rajesh Kumar Singh (appellant no. 2). Appellants filed application for Letter of Administration in favour of Rajesh Kumar Singh (appellant no. 2). All the heirs appeared before the learned Court below, and on 10.02.2009, appellant no. 4, namely, Sunita Singh, (witness no. 1), was examined in Court. Similarly, on 08.04.2009, appellant No. 3, namely, Smt. Arun Mala Singh @ Arun Mala Singh (Witness No. 2) was examined. On 15.04.2009, respondent no. 2, namely, Pinky Singh, (Witness No. 3) was examined; on 06.05.2009, appellant no.1, namely Prabhash Kumar Singh (witness no.4) was examined likewise appellant no.2, namely, Rajesh Kumar Singh (witness no. 5) was examined. Respondent no.1, namely, Amit Kumar Singh (Witness No.1 for Opposite Party) was examined on 11-03-2010. All the witnesses have stated that they have no objection if the Letter of Administration is issued in favour of Rajesh Kumar Singh. It is further submitted that respondents nos. 3 and 4, namely, Sanny Kumar Singh and Saurabh Kumar Singh, respectively, were minors at the time of filing of the case and were under the guardianship of their mother, namely, Smt. Pinky Singh, and now they have become major.

6. Learned counsel for the Appellants submits that on 25-05-2010, the learned Court below directed the Branch Manager of the Bank to open the said locker and submit his report regarding value of articles kept in the locker so that the court fee can be paid. On 13-12-2010, the Bank submitted its valuation report in the court with letter No. 38/174 dated 01-12-2010 and the same is kept on record. The matter was transferred to Additional District and Session Judge, Banka on 29-03-2016, and on 09-11-2016, the application of the appellants was disposed of without issuing a Letter of Administration. Learned counsel for