A.No.5652 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Order reserved on

02.03.2023

Order pronounced on

19.04.2023

CORAM

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

A.No.5652 of 2022

in

O.P.No.177 of 2020

Balasubramaniyan

... Applicant/2^nd Respondent

vs.

Vedambalaachi (deceased)

K.Mariappan

... Respondent/Petitioner

PRAYER IN A.No.5652 of 2022: This Application is filed under Order

XIV Rule 8 of O.S. Rules r/w Order XXV Rule 62 of O.S. Rules r/w Section

263 of the Indian Succession Act praying to revoke the letters of

administration granted in O.P. No.177/2020 dated 07.09.2021.

Applicant

: Mr.V.K.Vijayaragavan

Mr.P.T.Nalin Kumar

Respondent

: Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel,

for Mr.S.K.Kannadasan &

Mr.M.Simon Jeyakumar

O R D E R

_____________

Page No.1 of 20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.5652 of 2022

This application was filed by the 2^nd respondent in O.P.No.177 of

2020 (the main O.P.) to revoke the letters of administration granted on

07.09.2021 with the Will dated 26.09.1966 of the late S.K.Subbiah Pillai

annexed thereto.

2. The applicant states that he is the brother of the respondent

herein/petitioner in the main O.P. Both the applicant and the respondent are

the grandsons of the testator's brother. Upon the death of the testator's only

daughter, the applicant asserts that he has a caveatable interest in the estate

of the testator and was impleaded as the second respondent. He further

contends that a caveat in the main O.P. was filed by him on 12.10.2020 and

the same was communicated to the respondent herein on 13.10.2020. A

supporting affidavit raising objections was also filed on 15.10.2020 under

S.R.No.15484 of 2020.

3. The applicant further states that no notice was served on him in

the main O.P., in spite of him being impleaded as per order dated 02.11.2020

in A.No.2166 of 2020. Therefore, the grant suffers from legal infirmity and

_____________

Page No.2 of 20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.5652 of 2022

there is “just cause” under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925

(the Act) to revoke the grant.

4. These assertions were denied by the respondent on the ground

that the applicant was fully aware of these proceedings and chose not to

contest. The respondent further states that he did not receive a copy of the

objection affidavit of the applicant and that the applicant did not comply

with the requirements of Order 25 Rule 52 of the Madras High Court

Original Side Rules, 1994 (the Original Side Rules). The respondent also

asserts that the Will forming the subject of these testamentary proceedings

was exhibited in evidence as Ex.A27 in a civil suit (O.S.No.12 of 1998) to

which the applicant was a party and not objected to by him. Therefore, the

respondent states that there is no merit in the application.

5. Oral arguments were advanced by Mr.V.K.Vijayaragavan,

learned counsel for the applicant and V.Raghavachari, learned senior

counsel for the respondent.

_____________

Page No.3 of 20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.5652 of 2022

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, upon coming

to know of the filing of the main O.P., the applicant lodged a caveat by

serving a copy thereof on the respondent herein on 13.10.2020. He also

submitted that an objection affidavit was filed by the applicant on

15.10.2020 under S.R.No.15484 of 2020. After pointing out that the

applicant was impleaded as the second respondent in the main O.P., learned

counsel submitted that notice in the main O.P. was not served on the

applicant. He further submitted that it was erroneously recorded in the order

dated 07.09.2021 that the applicant/second respondent in the main O.P. had

no objection to the grant of letters of