The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory requirement of a succession certificate under S.214 of the Indian Succession Act for the recovery of a deceased person's debt.

1. This appeal raises the question whether a person deriving title under the registered will of a deceased creditor, can claim to recover the debt due to the deceased, without production of a succession certificate.

2. The plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest Raman Nambudiri deceased, had a savings as well as a fixed deposit account at the time of his death on 15-12-1953 with defendant, Messrs. Chaldean Syrian Bank Ltd., Trichur. Under the registered will dated 3-6-1946 left by Raman Nambudiri, the plaintiff and his minor sons were made the sole legatees of these bank deposits. On demand by the plaintiff for transfer in his name of the amounts concerned, the defendants first required a consent statement from all the members of the illom and subsequently on the plaintiff's failure to produce the same, they called fora succession certificate. The plaintiff obtained succession certificate on 22-10-1954, but limited to the savings deposit. The Bank insisted upon a succession certificate for the entire amount. The plaintiff did not comply but filed this suit soon after, on 7-6-1955 demanding both the deposit amounts with all interest till date.

3. The summons in the case were served to the defendants on 14-6-1955. Entering appearance on 9-7-1955, the defendants paid off the amounts covered by the succession certificate and set-up contest as to the plaintiff's balance claim without however depositing into court the same or any portion thereof. Apparently on legal advice, the plaintiff thereafter applied for and obtained extension certificate in respect of the fixed deposit amount and all the interest therein till date and filed the same in court on 8-11-1955. The defendants thereupon deposited into court the principal amount of Rs. 15,000 and interest thereon for the one year term only under the receipt ending 7-4-1954, amounting in all Rs. 15,675. The questions were therefore (i) the liability of the defendants for interest on the F.D. from 8-4-1954 and (ii) what should be the order as to costs.

4. On the first question, the court below found that in the absence of production of succession certificate, the plaintiff was not entitled to demand the fixed deposit amount, and no further interest till suit was therefore payable. On the second question the court below found that the defendants were liable so far as the savings deposit was concerned, because they had no excuse to withhold the same even after the production of the succession certificate. The defendants were however exempt from liability for costs as regards the fixed deposit, because the suit had been necessitated by the plaintiff's default to obtain succession certificate. Hence this appeal by the plaintiff on the interest and costs disallowed; and learned counsel for the plaintiff says that the plaintiff cannot be denied interest from 28-2-1953, the date of his demand notice and also his costs in any event.

5. Now S.214 of the Indian Succession Act (39 of 1925) forbids among others, the passing by a court of a decree against a debtor of a deceased person for payment of his debt to a person claiming on succession to be entitled to the effects of the deceased person or to any part thereof, except on production by the person so claiming of a succession certificate granted under Part X and having the debt specified therein. This section has been held to be mandatory. So much so, a court cannot pass a decree against its terms even if it is otherwise satisfied that the plaintiff is the real heir or the successor of the deceased. A conditional decree directing the production of a certificate before the execution of the decree has even been held to be illegal. And if the succession certificate is not produced before the decree and after an opportunity is given to the plaintiff, the only order the court can pass upon the suit is to dismiss it. So it was held in Ramutti v. Padmanabhan (A. I. R.1932 Mad. 301):

"An executor appointed by a will, for which probate need not be ob