SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1928 Supreme(Mad) 137

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Venkatasubba Rao, J.
Mt. Amir Bi
Versus
Abdul Rahim Sahib And Ors.
Decided On : 21 March, 1928

The main legal point established in the judgment is that an administration suit can be filed in the High Court, and the court has jurisdiction to decide questions of title to property outside its jurisdiction.

Headnote:

Jurisdiction - Administration Suit - Order 20 Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code - Suit for Land - Benode Behari Bose v. Nistarini Dassi (1905) L.R. 32 I.A. 163 : I.L.R. 33 C. 180 : 15 M.L.J. 331 to (P.C.) - Mahomed Ally Adamji v. Abdul Hussein (1923) I.L.R. 48 Bom. 331 - Srinivasa Moorthy v. Venkata Varada Aiyangar (1906) I.L.R. 29 M. 239 : 16 M.L.J. 238 - Nistarini Dassi v. Nundo Lal Bose (1902) I.L.R. 30 C. 369

Fact of the Case:

The widow of a deceased trader filed a suit seeking administration of the estate, realization of outstandings, payment of her mahar, and division of the residue among the heirs. The defendants contested the suit, claiming entitlement to a share of the estate.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the suit was an administration suit and not a suit for land. It held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the suit and decide questions of title to property outside its jurisdiction.

Issues: The main issues were whether the suit was an administration suit, whether it was a suit for land, and whether the court had jurisdiction to decide questions of title to property outside its jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Order 20, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code and various case laws including Benode Behari Bose v. Nistarini Dassi, Mahomed Ally Adamji v. Abdul Hussein, and Nistarini Dassi v. Nundo Lal Bose to establish that the suit was an administration suit and that it had jurisdiction to decide questions of title to property outside its jurisdiction.

Final Decision: The court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the suit and decided in favor of the plaintiff.

JUDGMENT

Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. A preliminary issue has been raised:

Has the Court jurisdiction to try the suit?

2. This involves a consideration of three points:

(1) Is this an administration suit?

(2) Is an administration suit a suit for land?

(3) If it is held that it is not, can the Court, in such a suit, where the land is wholly outside jurisdiction, decide questions of title to such land?

3. I shall first deal with the question : "Is this an administration suit?" Abdul Razaak Saheb, a Mahomedan, who was trading in Madras, died in 1920, leaving large assets consisting of moveables within the city and a few items of immoveable property wholly outside "this Courts jurisdiction. In this suit, which his widow has brought, she asks that the extent of Abdul Razaaks property may be ascertained, that his outstandings may be realised, that his estate may be administered, that her mahar may be paid and that the residue divisible among his heirs may be divided according to their shares under the law. These are, in short, the reliefs claimed in the plaint. Her children, as the heirs of their deceased father, have been impleaded as defendants 3 to 6. The plaintiffs case is, that the children of Abdul Razaak by his first wife, who predeceased him, released, during his lifetime, their right to the estate and that they and their heirs are not therefore entitled to any share of the property left by him. The 7th defendant is Abdul Razaaks son by his deceased first wife. At his death, Abdul Razaak left also a daughter by that wife, who died subsequently leaving defendants 8 to 17 as her heirs. Defendants 7 to 17 do not admit the plaintiffs allegation that they are not entitled to a share in the estate.

4. With these observations, I shall now examine the plaint. In paragraph 6, the plaintiff says that her husband died leaving to his credit in the firm at Madras, of which he was a partner, a very large sum, about a lakh of rupees. In paragraph 11 she claims that mahar is payable to her and that it forms the first charge on the estate. In paragraph 12, she says that Abdul Razaaks property is divisible only among herself and her children, namely, defendants 3 to 6. Paragraphs 13 to 15 deal with the effect of the release executed by the children of Abdul Razaak by his predeceased wife. The plaintiff claims that, should the Court find that the release is not binding upon them, they should be directed to restore to the estate, the benefits received by them under that release. I may here incidentally mention that they obtained under the release certain immoveable properties outside the jurisdiction of this Court. Having made these allegations the plaintiff prays:

(1) That it may be declared that defendants 7 to 17 are not the heirs of Abdul Razaak;

(2) That her mahar may be paid;

(3) That an account may be taken of the properties and assets left by Abdul Razaak and available for division;

(4) That his estate may be administered under the decree of Court;

(5) That if the Court should be of the opinion that the release is not binding on defendants 7 to 17, they should be directed to bring back the benefits received under the release; and

(6) That the estate may be divided among the rightful heirs according to their shares under the law.

5. It has been contended for the defence that this is not an administration suit. I find it very difficult to follow this argument. The plaint raises these various questions:

What were the properties left by the deceased Abdul Razaak?

Who are the parties entitled to his estate?

What is his property now available for division?

6. This, surely, is not a suit for partition, pure and simple. One of the reliefs claimed, no doubt, is that the property should ultimately be partitioned; but that does not make the suit a partition suit. Administration means management of the deceaseds estate. The Court is requested to assume its management, to take upon itself the functions of an executor or administrator and administer the estate. The administr



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top