In this petition under section 115 C.P.C. the petitioner has impugned the order dated 24.3.88 passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar, in Civil Misc. Case No. 2 (Letters of Administration) of 1985. By the impugned order learned District Judge cancelled the earlier order by which the petitioner was appointed as Administrator pendente lite and appointed another beneficiary Sri Priya brata Gupta, respondent No. 1 as Administrator pendente lite in respect of Sarala Tea Estate which is subject matter of Misc. Case No. 2 (Letters of Ad­ministration) of 1985.

2. I have heard Mr. B. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Deb, learned counsel for the opposite parties. Mr Das has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds;

a) Learned court below in passing the impugned order has acted illegally and without jurisdiction inasmuch as such order of cancellation and appointment can only be passed in exercise of power under section 269 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). But ostensibly the testator was a Hindu and the beneficiaries are also Hindus. So power under section 269 of the Act could not be exercised by the l

Click Here to Read the rest of this document