2017 Supreme(Chh) 25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Sanjay Agrawal, J.
Smt. Hirman Bai D/o Late Ramsundar - Petitioner
Versus
Divisional Forest Officer Koriya Forest Division Baikunthpur, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh) and Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (227) No. 190 OF 2017
Decided On : 09-03-2017
For the Petitioner: Chandresh Shrivastava
Headnote:
Constitution of India – Art. 227 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 10 - Indian Succession Act, 1925- Section 372- Grant of succession certificate Legality and propriety of orders – Rejection of application under - Civil Suit instituted by the petitioner for declaration of title and injunction with regard to the immovable property of deceased – Rejection on the ground that as per the provision of Section 10 of the CPC, only the suit could be stayed and not the proceeding initiated under the Act, 1925. The trial Court has observed further that since both the proceedings are different with each other, therefore, the application as filed is liable to be rejected – Held, On the basis of the precedent as well as the principle, it has become evident that the proceedings, in a regular suit and the proceedings which are summary in nature contemplated by Section 372 of the Act, 1925 are entirety different and the latter proceedings would not be covered by Section 10 of the CPC. The object of issuance of a certificate and its effect is entirely different which would not result into deciding the issue finally between the parties - Proceedings, in a regular suit and the proceedings which are summary in nature contemplated by Section 372 of the Act, 1925 are entirety different and the latter proceedings would not be covered by Section 10 of the CPC. The object of issuance of a certificate and its effect is entirely different which would not result into deciding the issue finally between the parties – Petition dismissed
Heard on admission.
1. This is a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality and propriety of the orders dated 26.9.2016 (Annexure P/1) and 3.11.2016 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Civil Judge, Class-I, Chirmiri, District Koriya and Second Additional District Judge, Manendragarh respectively whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CPC') has been rejected.
2. Undisputed facts of the case are that the petitioner has initiated the proceedings as per the provisions prescribed under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1925') for grant of succession certificate with regard to the service dues of late Jagarniya as she is her sole legal heir. During its pendency, a civil suit bearing Civil Suit No. 62-A of 2016 was instituted by the petitioner for declaration of title and injunction with regard to the immovable property left by said Jagarniya.
3. During the pendency of aforesaid proceedings, the petitioner has moved an application under Section 10 of the CPC, for staying the said succession proceedings till decision of the said civil suit.
4. Upon due consideration of the said application, the trial Court by its order impugned dated 26.9.2016 has rejected the said application on the ground that as per the provision of Section 10 of the CPC, only the suit could be stayed and not the proceeding initiated under the Act, 1925. The trial Court has observed further that since both the proceedings are different with each other, therefore, the application as filed is liable to be rejected. In consequence the said application filed under Section 10 of the CPC is rejected.
5. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred a miscellaneous appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of the CPC to the appellate Court, who in turn, observed that neither an appeal nor a miscellaneous appeal as such could be maintainable. Consequently, the appellate Court has rejected the said miscellaneous appeal by order dated 03/11/2016.
6. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has filed this petition.
7. Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while rejecting the application filed under Section 10 of the CPC, the Courts below have committed an illegality, and therefore, the same deserves to be set aside and the proceedings initiated under Section 372 of the Act, 1925, are required to be stayed, pending decision of the said civil suit.
8. I have considered the entire record and perused the impugned orders.
9. Undisputedly, the petitioner has initiated a proceeding under Section 372 of the Act, 1925 for grant of succession certificate with regard to the service dues of late Jagarniya as she is the only heir of her and after initiation of said proceeding, the petitioner has instituted a civil suit being Civil Suit No. 62-A of 2016 by claiming declaration of title and injunction with regard to the immovable property left by said Jagarniya.
10. The petitioner, by way of the said application, is praying for staying the succession proceeding, pending decision of the said civil suit. The question, therefore, involved in this case is whether Section 10 of the CPC is applicable to the proceedings initiated under Section 372 of the Act, 1925 for obtaining a succession certificate. In order to ascertain, as to, whether it, could be stayed, pending decision of the suit, by applying the provisions prescribed under Section 10 of the CPC, it is necessary to examine the said provision, which reads as under:-
“10. Stay of suit.- No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in 1[India