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

2020 Supreme(Mad) 308

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. KIRUBAKARAN, ABDUL QUDDHOSE, JJ.
J. Deepak - Appellant
Versus
J. Deepa - Respondent
O.P.No. 630 of 2018
Decided On : 27-05-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S.L. Sudarsanam, Advocate. For the Respondent:Thondan Subramanian, Advocate. For the Caveators:N.S. Nandakumar, Advocate.

The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of Class II legal heirs to inherit the estate of the deceased in the absence of a will, as provided under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

Headnote:

India Succession Act - Inheritance of Late Chief Minister's Estate - Sections 218, 278 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the inheritance rights under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, specifically focusing on Sections 218 and 278. The judgment highlighted the legal provisions related to the inheritance of property in the absence of a will and the entitlement of legal heirs, emphasizing the Class II heirs' rights. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of these provisions and their application to the specific case.

Fact of the Case:

The petition was filed to grant letters of administration for the properties and credits of the deceased J. Jayalalitha. The case revolved around determining the legal heirs entitled to inherit the estate left behind by the deceased, who was unmarried and had no direct legal heir. The petitioner and the respondent, children of the deceased's brother, sought Letters of Administration under the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner and the respondent, as Class II legal heirs, were entitled to inherit the estate of the deceased Chief Minister. The court also rejected the caveat filed by third parties, emphasizing the lack of caveatable interest and the legal rights of the Class II heirs.

Issues: The main issue was to determine the entitlement of legal heirs to inherit the estate of the deceased Chief Minister, who had no direct legal heir and had not left a will. Additionally, the court addressed the opposition from third parties and their claim for Letters of Administration.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Indian Succession Act, specifically highlighting the entitlement of Class II legal heirs in the absence of a will. The court also emphasized the lack of caveatable interest for third parties and the legal rights of the Class II heirs.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, granting the petitioner and the respondent Letters of Administration for the estate and credits of the deceased Chief Minister. Additionally, the court directed the creation of a registered Public Trust in the name of the deceased for public and social service.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 218 and 278 of the India Succession Act, 1925 r/w Order XXV Rule 5 of the O.S.Rules to grant letters of administration to the properties and credits of the J.Jayalalitha deceased to have effect throughout the whole of the Union of India.)

N. Kirubakaran, J.

The departure of a leader, not only left a political vacuum, but also questions either regarding legal heirs to inherit her estate or political heir to continue her political legacy.

2. Late Chief Minister Dr.J Jayalalithaa was given mandate to rule the State in four State assembly general elections. The electoral success not only speaks about her strong leadership, but also about her charisma which enchanted the people of Tamil Nadu. When such was her success on the political front, very unfortunately on the personal side, this Court has to deal with the issue of legal heirs who are entitled to inherit the estate left behind by the deceased Dr.J Jayalalithaa.

3. Late Chief Minister Dr.J Jayalalithaa was unmarried and had one brother by name J.Jayakumar, who predeceased her. In the absence of any direct legal heir, only the niece and nephew could be termed as legal heirs. Therefore, the petitioner and the respondent, who are the children of Jayakumar have approached this Court seeking Letters of Administration under Sections 218 and 278 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of the properties and credits of deceased J Jayalalithaa.

4. The petitioner states that he is the nephew of Dr.J Jayalalithaa and the respondent is her niece. In the petition, it is stated that J Jayalalithaa, daughter of Jayaram died intestate on 05.12.2016. Dr.J Jayalalithaa's father Jayaram died long back and her mother, Sandhya @ Vedha Jayaram died on 02.11.1971. Jayaram and Sandhya had two children, namely, J.Jayakumar and J Jayalalithaa. The said Jayakumar married one Vijayalakshmi and out of the said wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent were born. Jayakumar died on 13.10.1995 and his wife died on 24.01.2013. As J Jayalalithaa died unmarried, without any issues, the petitioner and the respondent, who are the children of her brother, fall under Entry IV of Class II Hindu Succession Act and they are entitled to inherit her estate. According to the petitioner, there is no other person, who is a close relative of the deceased, other than the petitioner and the respondent. It is also stated that in spite of diligent efforts, no Will of the deceased J. Jayalalithaa could be traced by the petitioner and the respondent.

5. After the demise of J Jayalalithaa on 05.12.2016, the petitioner approached the Tahsildar, Guindy Taluk on 16.08.2017 seeking legal heirship certificate of deceased J Jayalalithaa. By reply dated 22.09.2017, the Tahsildar informed the petitioner to approach the Civil Court for getting legal heirship certificate. Therefore, the petitioner, making his sister as the respondent, has approached this Court seeking Letters of Administration to administer the properties and credits of deceased J Jayalalithaa.

6. The property, namely, the house at No.36, “Veda Nilayam”, Poes Garden, Chennai – 600 086 was possessed by late Chief Minister Dr.J Jayalalithaa as she had obtained a citation for Letters of Administration of the properties including the above mentioned property in O.P.No.164 of 1973 on 22.11.1973 as per Will dated 01.11.1971 executed by her mother Sandhya @ Vedha Jayaram. The petitioner would claim that he and the respondent, being children of the brother of the deceased and Class II legal heirs, are each entitled to half share in the estate of the deceased J Jayalalithaa. The amount of assets, which are likely to come into the hands of the petitioner and the respondent is about Rs.188,48,66,305.51. The petitioner also filed an affidavit of valuation of the assets and the list of movable and immovable properties of deceased Dr.J Jayalalithaa, including the investments in firms (capital shares) and motor vehicles owned by her. The responden

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