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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2125

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. PARTHIBAN, J.
R. Ispahani & Another – Appellant
Versus
------------------
Original Petition Diary No. 9264 of 2021
Decided on : 29-09-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :T.R. Rajagopalan, Senior Counsel for M/s. P. Veena Suresh, Advocates

Headnote:

Indian Succession Act - Section 372 - Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 - Article 6 of the Schedule-I and Sections 55 and 56, Schedule-I (Article 7) - Succession Certificate - Grant of Probate - Original Side Rules of this Court, praying that a Succession Certificate may be granted in the name of the first petitioner with power to collect the securities and to receive the interest and dividends and negotiate and transfer the securities specified in the schedule - Whether Succession Certificate can be granted - Held, Said Writ Petitions where challenge is to the Constitutionality of the relevant provisions mandating payment of ad- valorem Court Fee for grant of Succession Certificate. The early hearing of the above two Writ Petitions would lead to certainty in the matter of payment of Court Fee for grant of Succession Certificate, as the Registry is likely to be confronted with many such claims from the potential litigants seeking issuance of Succession Certificate - Ordered accordingly

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Original Side Rules of this Court, praying that a Succession Certificate may be granted in the name of the first petitioner with power to collect the securities and to receive the interest and dividends and negotiate and transfer the securities specified in the schedule.)

1. The above Original Petition has been filed under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of Succession Certificate.

2. The Registry of this Court, finding that no sufficient Court Fee being paid as mandated in the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955, in terms of the Schedule-I (Article 7), returned the Original Petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner responded to the returns made by the Registry by stating that the Court Fee payable for grant of Succession Certificate is comparable to the one for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration, in terms of Article 6 of the Schedule-I and Sections 55 and 56 of the Act, 1955.

4. Originally, in terms of the relevant provisions, ad-valorem Court Fee was chargeable even for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration, but subsequently, the Court Fee Rationalisation Committee was constituted pursuant to the order of this Court in a batch of Writ Petitions and the said Committee recommended that maximum Court Fee of Rs.25,000/- be paid for Probate or Letters of Administration with or without the annexation of Will. The Committee found that fixation of ad-valorem Court Fee of 3% was irrational, as on the death of a person, no transfer is involved, as the legal heirs succeed to the Estate as per the Succession Law. This recommendation was accepted and Article 6 of Schedule-I of the Act, 1955, was accordingly amended and now, the maximum Court Fee payable on the application for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration is Rs.25,000/-.

5. According to the learned counsel, Article 11(k) of Schedule-II of the Act, 1955, applies to applications for Probate or Letters of Administration filed before the District Court. However, no amendment was carried out as per the recommendation of the Committee referred to above in respect of the application for Probate or Letters of Administration to be filed in the District Court. As per the said Article, if a Caveat is filed in an application for Probate or Letters of Administration, the application is registered as a suit and one-half of the scale of Fee prescribed under Article 1 of Schedule I (of the Act, 1955) on the market value of the Estate is to be paid as Court Fee.

6. The issue relating to the question whether an application filed for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration, is only an application or a suit, came up for consideration as early as in 1988 before a Division Bench of this Court and in the judgment reported in AIR 1989 Madras 111 = 1988 (2) LW 181 (DB) (Philo Peter & Arputhasamy Vs. Divyanathan & Mariapushpam), after adverting to various case laws and the submissions of the parties, the Division Bench held that in terms of Section 295 of the Indian Succession Act, any contest against grant of Probate or Letters of Administration, the application did not become a suit in the strict sense of the term and in that regard, no Court Fee is payable as suit proceedings under Article 11(k) of Schedule-II of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955.

7. Drawing parallel to the proceedings for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration, application for grant of Succession Certificate is also in the nature of application, and therefore, the principle laid down by the Division Bench needs to be applied and no ad-valorem Court Fee is payable under Article 11(k) of Schedule-II of the Act, 1955.

8. The substance of the claim of the petitioner is that the Succession Certificate cannot be treated different from an application for grant of Probate or Letters of Administration. Hence, the maximum Cou

      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