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

2012 Supreme(Mad) 318

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH
First
Versus
Second
A.No.2662 of 2008 and O.A.No.651 of 2008 in O.P.No.625 of 2007 & A.No.4240 of 2008 in O.P.No.785 of 2006
Decided On : 23-01-2012

Headnote:

Letters of Administration - Revocation - Indian Succession Act, Section 263 - The court found that the respondent had failed to implead the next of kin and legatees with caveatable interest, and had made false claims regarding her relationship with the deceased testator. The court held that the non-impleadment of necessary parties and the false claims were just cause for revoking the letters of administration granted to the respondent. The court also dismissed the applications for injunction and direction to deposit fair rent, stating that such reliefs were beyond the jurisdiction of the testamentary court.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought revocation of the grant of Letters of Administration to the respondent, citing false particulars and non-impleadment of necessary parties. The respondent claimed to be the grand daughter of the deceased testator, but the applicant disputed this claim.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondent's claims were false and that the non-impleadment of necessary parties and legatees with caveatable interest was just cause for revoking the letters of administration. The court also dismissed the applications for injunction and direction to deposit fair rent, stating that such reliefs were beyond the jurisdiction of the testamentary court.

Issues: False claims regarding relationship with the deceased testator, non-impleadment of necessary parties and legatees with caveatable interest, jurisdiction of the testamentary court to grant injunction and direction to deposit fair rent.

Ratio Decidendi: The non-impleadment of necessary parties and legatees with caveatable interest, and the false claims regarding relationship with the deceased testator were just cause for revoking the letters of administration. The testamentary court did not have jurisdiction to grant injunction or direction to deposit fair rent.

Final Decision: The court ordered the revocation of the letters of administration granted to the respondent, and dismissed the applications for injunction and direction to deposit fair rent.

Judgment :-

A.No.2662 of 2008 in O.P.No.625 of 2007: This application has been filed by the third party to the original petition to revoke the grant of Letters of Administration annexed with the Will dated 28.02.2005, to the respondent by its order dated 16.11.2007.

2. O.A.No.651 of 2008 in O.P.No.625 of 2007: This application has been filed to grant an order of injunction restraining the respondents from claiming or receiving the documents of title relating to the property of late Viswam Shri Kandan from Commercial Employees Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd, Chennai.

3. A.No.4240 of 2008 in O.P.No.785 of 2006: This application has been filed by the applicant/petitioner seeking for a direction against the respondent to deposit the sum of Rs.34,51,702/-, being the arrears of rent payable till 31.08.2008 and thereafter, at the rate of Rs.71,020/- for every month on or before the5th of succeeding month commencing from October 2008.

4. Heard Mr.K.P.S.Kasthurirangan learned counsel appearing for M/s.Sampathkumar Associates for the applicant in all the applications and Mr.M.Venkatachalapathy, learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.M.Sriram, for the respondents in all the applications.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant would submit in his argument that the respondent in the applications, OA.No.651 of 2008 and A.No.2662 of 2008 had applied for a grant of Letters of Administration in O.P.No.625 of 2007 on the foot of a Will said to have been executed on 28.02.2005 by one Viswam Shri Kandan and the respondent/petitioner did not add any person who has got interest in the said property as respondents and obtained Letters of Administration on 16.11.2007. He would further submit that the said testator Viswam Shri Kandan was having three brothers namely V.Ramachandran, V.L.Narayanan and Dwarakanath and one sister namely Sarojini and the said Viswam Shri Kandan died as a bachelor and he did not marry anybody till his death. Therefore, the brothers and sister of the deceased Viswam Shri Kandan, were the legal representatives of the said Viswam Sri Kandan, in the absence of any Will and the applicant herein is the son of Dwarakanath, who is the younger brother of Viswam Shri Kandan and the said Viswam Shri Kandan had executed a registered Will in favour of said Dwarahanath on 13.12.2004 in the presence of two attesting witnesses and the same was registered with Sub-Registrar, Mylapore, Chennai, in respect of the property bearing Old No.82, New No.100 in Chamiers Road and the same was filed in testamentary proceedings in O.P.No.785 of 2006 and the father of the applicant Dwarakanath died during the pendency of the proceedings and therefore, the applicant himself was impleaded as petitioner and other legal representatives, as respondents, in the said proceedings. Thereafter, this Court had granted Letters of Administration on 3.3.2008 in favour of the applicant. He would also submit that the Viswam Sri Kandan has also executed another Will in favour of the father of the applicant regarding the propertes at Idukki District, and he was the legatee under the said Will would further submit that the respondent was very much aware that the applicant's father Dwarakanath was the legatee under the Wills executed by the testator, to which, the petitioner has referred to in the main original petition itself but did not elect to cite the father of the applicant Dwarakanath as well as other legatees of the earlier Wills of the testator as respondents in the original petition. The legatees under the previous Wills are certainly having caveatable interest in the subject matter. He would also submit that the other legal representatives of the deceased Viswam Shri Kandan namely brothers and sister were not cited as respondents in the original petition since they have also got caveatable interest. He would further submit in his argument that the deceased Viswam Shri Kandan died as bachalor but it has been stated in the petition that the r

































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