Advocates:
['ROHIT JOSHI', '', 'SHRI A C DHARMADHIKARI', 'ADV', 'MADHUR A DEO', 'BHUSHAN N MOHATA', '', 'P M PANDE', 'AKANKSHA SURESH WANJARI', 'P M PANDE']

firstappeal1602.2019.odt

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1602 OF 2019

Sushilkumar s/o Motilal Sharma

(since deceased) through his Legal

Heirs-

1]

Smt. Sneha Sushilkumar Sharma,

Aged about 60 years, Occu- Household.

2]

Manish Sushilkumar Sharma,

Aged about 32 years, Occu-Service.

3]

Ms. Ashima Sushilkumar Sharma,

Aged about 30 years, Occu-Nil.

All r/o Plot No. 59, Near Ramkrishna

Math, Dhantoli, Nagpur.

.......APPELLANTS

[Orig. Applicant]

[On R.A.]

...V E R S U S...

1]

Umeshkumar s/o Motilal Sharma,

Aged about 62 years, Occu: Nil,

R/o House No. 98, West Park Road,

Dhantoli, Nagpur (Deleted Name)

2]

Sunilkumar s/o Motilal Sharma,

Aged about 61 years, Occ-Business.

3]

Piyush s/o Umeshkumar Sharma,

Aged about 33 years, Occu - Service,

2 & 3 R/o House No.98, West Park Road,

Dhantoli, Nagpur.

firstappeal1602.2019.odt

2

3]

Piyush s/o Umeshkumar Sharma,

Aged Major, Occu: Service,

R/o Buyer, WIW, 62/2 Reliance Retail,

2^nd Floor, Richmond Road,

Bangalore-560025.

4] State Bank of India,

Kingsway Branch, Nagpur through

its Branch Manager.

5] Central Bank of India,

Station Road Branch,

Nagpur through its Branch Manager.

6] Punjab National Bank,

Kingsway Branch, Nagpur through

its Branch Manager.

...

RESPONDENTS

Ori. Non-Applicants

On R.A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shri A.C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the Appellants.

Shri Piyush Shukla, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

Ms Ruksar Parveen Sheikh, Advocate h/f Shri Anil Kumar,

Advocate for Respondent No.4.

Mrs Anita Mategaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.5.

Shri B.N. Mohata, Advocate for Respondent No.6.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM

: S.M. MODAK, J.

RESERVED ON

: 07.06.2021

PRONOUNCED ON

: 11.06.2021

ORAL JUDGMENT

1]

Heard finally by consent of learned advocate

appearing for the parties.

Amendment carry out as

per Registrar (J) order

dt. 17/03/2020

Sd/-

C.F. Appellant

14/12/2020

firstappeal1602.2019.odt

3

2]

Admit.

3]

The Court of 4^th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division,

Nagpur, as per the judgment dated 25/07/2019 was pleased

to dismiss the application of present appellants. It was for

grant of Succession Certificate / Letter of Administration /

Heirship Certificate. On reading the order, what this Court

find is that the trial Court was too much technical in deciding

the matter. In respect of certain points, the trial Court has

taken rigid view whereas in respect of certain points the trial

Court interpreted the law incorrectly.

4]

I have heard learned advocate Shri A.C.

Dharmadhikari for the Appellants, Shri Piyush Shukla,

learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2, Ms Ruksar

Parveen Sheikh, Advocate h/f Shri Anil Kumar, learned

Advocate for Respondent No.4, Mrs Anita Mategaonkar,

learned Advocate for Respondent No.5 and Shri B.N. Mohata,

Advocate for Respondent No.6. The Respondent No.3 though

served has chosen to remain absent. The appellants have filed

the pleadings, documents and evidence as per the Pursis

firstappeal1602.2019.odt

4

dated 21.09.2020. The appeal was heard on that basis, by

consent of both sides.

5]

There is certain amount lying in the savings bank

account with the State Bank of India. Though account stands

in the name of Sushilkumar Motilal Sharma, he claimed that

money belongs to the deceased Motilal Sharma. Apart from

that, deceased Motilal was also having a locker in the State

Bank of India, Kingsway Branch - Respondent No.4, locker

with Central Bank of India - Respondent No.5 and Punjab

National Bank- Respondent No.6. Though the appellants

while filing the application before the trial Court were not

aware about the articles kept in the locker, when the Court

Commissioner/Advocate Rakesh Ramraj Dwivedi was

appointed, it was transpired that three lockers contain cash

amount and golden ornaments.

6]

The trail Court rejected the applicatio