Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Reilly, J.
Unithali Ramutti and Anr.
Versus
Kuttala Padmanabha Chetti
Decided On : 02.12.1931
Succession Act - Executor's Requirement for Succession Certificate
Fact of the Case:
The court held that an executor appointed by a will, for which probate need not be obtained and has not been obtained, is not exempted from the requirement of producing a succession certificate before getting a decree for a debt due to the testator's estate.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the provisions of Section 214 of the Succession Act and concluded that the requirement for a succession certificate applies to such an executor, as the words of the section clearly include them. The court dismissed the petition and extended the time for obtaining the certificate by two months.
Issues: Interpretation of Section 214 of the Succession Act and whether it applies to an executor appointed by a will for which probate need not be obtained.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 214 of the Succession Act and held that the requirement for a succession certificate applies to an executor appointed by a will, even if probate need not be obtained.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the time for obtaining the succession certificate was extended by two months.
Reilly, J.
1. I see no reason to hold that an executor appointed by a will for which probate need not be obtained and has not been obtained, is exempted from the requirement of Section 214, Succession Act to produce a succession certificate before he can get a decree for a debt due to the testators estate. The words of the section appear to me clearly to include such an executor. It is contended by Mr. Govinda Menon that such an executor does not claim on succession" within the meaning of the section. But not only would these words in their ordinary meaning include such a testator: Clause b(1) of the section includes among persons "so claiming," i.e. on succession, executors who have obtained probate. The opinion of the Full Bench in Ramiah v. Venkatasubbamma A.I.R. 1926 Mad. 434, regarding the vesting of the testators property in an executor by a will for which prebate is unnecessary, does not affect this question; and it may be noticed that in that case the opinion of Wallis, C.J., in Balkrishnadu v. Narayanaswamy Chetty A.I.R.1914 Mad.51, that such an executor must obtain a succession certificate before he can get a decree for a debt is quoted with approval.
2. This petition is dismissed.
3. Time for obtaining the certificate is extended by two months from this date.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
