Read full Act

R.6 Inventory and account

Inventory and account :_ The order for grant of probate or letters of administration shall direct the grantee to file in Court, within six months, and one year, respectively, the inventory and account prescribed by Section 277 of the Indian Succession Act, 1865, and Section 98 of the Probate and Administration Act, 1881 (now Section 317 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925).

---

Legal Commentary on Section R.6 of Andhra Pradesh Rules Under The Indian Succession Act 1925

Introduction

Section R.6 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, pertains to procedural aspects related to the grant of succession certificates, especially in contexts involving amendments, appeals, and procedural irregularities. The Indian Succession Act, 1925, as a principal legislation, governs testamentary and intestate succession in India, with specific provisions for procedural matters such as applications, appeals, and revocations. The Andhra Pradesh Rules supplement these provisions with local procedural guidelines.

What does Section R.6 Say?

Section R.6 deals with procedural matters related to applications for succession certificates, amendments, and appeals, emphasizing the process of filing, the scope of review, and the appellate procedures within the framework of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, as adopted by the State rules.

Essential Ingredients

• Filing of applications for succession certificates in accordance with the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
• Procedure for amendments to applications or petitions under the rules.
• Grounds and process for appeal or review against orders relating to succession certificates.
• Clarification that proceedings are summary but subject to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, especially regarding parties and appeals.
• Emphasis on the importance of compliance with procedural rules for validity of applications and appeals.

Scope of Section R.6

• Applies to all applications and proceedings for succession certificates under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 within Andhra Pradesh.
• Covers procedural aspects including amendments, appeals, and revocations.
• Ensures uniformity in practice and adherence to legal standards for succession proceedings.
• Clarifies the relationship between local rules and the Indian Succession Act, 1925.
• Addresses the scope of judicial review and appellate jurisdiction in succession matters.

Punishment for Section R.6

• The section itself does not prescribe any specific punishment. However, violations such as filing false affidavits or non-compliance with procedural rules may attract penalties under relevant laws like Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code or contempt proceedings.

Legal Comments

• "Procedural compliance" - Emphasizes that applications under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, must strictly adhere to procedural rules, including amendments and appeals, to be valid [Section R.6].
• "Amendment procedures" - Clarifies that rejection of amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. during succession proceedings does not automatically entail appeal under Section 299, but can be challenged via revision [Section R.6].
• "Appealability" - Reiterates that orders refusing to revoke succession certificates are not appealable under Section 384 but can be challenged through revision under Section 115 C.P.C. [Section R.6].
• "Summary nature of proceedings" - Affirms that succession certificate proceedings are summary but do not preclude parties from filing suits or challenging orders via civil remedies [Section R.6].
• "Parties and intervention" - Permits third parties or legal heirs to intervene or be impleaded even in summary proceedings, aligning with the principle that procedural rules like Or. 1, Rule 10 C.P.C. are applicable [Section R.6].
• "Jurisdiction of courts" - Confirms that the District Judge or competent court exercising powers under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, must follow the procedure laid down in the Act and the Civil Procedure Code, including parties’ rights [Section R.6].
• "Revocation of certificates" - Proceedings for revocation under Section 383 are to be initiated based on grounds such as fraud, defect in proceedings, or subsequent findings; procedural compliance is essential [Section R.6].
• "Effect of decisions" - Decisions in succession proceedings are not final or res judicata; parties can institute civil suits to contest or challenge the certificates or orders [Section R.6].
• "Application for substitution" - Legal heirs can apply for substitution as parties without necessarily obtaining probate, provided procedural requirements are met, but proper notice and party inclusion are necessary [Section R.6].
• "Role of the Civil Procedure Code" - The provisions of the CPC, especially regarding parties, amendments, and appeals, are generally applicable unless explicitly excluded, ensuring procedural fairness [Section R.6].
• "Appeal against orders" - Orders refusing to revoke succession certificates or rejecting amendments are subject to revision, not appeal, highlighting the limited scope of appellate jurisdiction in such proceedings [Section R.6].
• "Court’s discretion" - Courts have discretion under Section 373(3) to grant certificates even if questions of law or fact are intricate, but procedural rules must be followed [Section R.6].
• "Local rules and national law" - The Andhra Pradesh Rules are designed to supplement the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and courts must interpret procedural issues in harmony with national law [Section R.6].
• "Legal heirs and rights" - The law permits legal heirs to file applications and seek succession certificates without prior probate, provided they establish their rights through proper evidence [Section R.6].
• "Rejection of applications" - Rejection of applications or amendments must be grounded in procedural or substantive irregularities; mere technical objections are insufficient [Section R.6].
• "Summary proceedings" - While proceedings are summary, they do not bar parties from raising substantive rights or contesting certificates through civil suits [Section R.6].
• "Inclusion of third parties" - The rules allow third parties to intervene or be impleaded, ensuring that all interested parties can be heard, aligning with principles of natural justice [Section R.6].
• "Legal remedies" - Parties aggrieved by orders can seek revision or challenge in civil courts, emphasizing procedural safeguards [Section R.6].

Summary Bullet Points

• "Procedural adherence" - Strict compliance with application and appeal procedures is mandatory [Section R.6].
• "Amendments" - Rejection of amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. can be challenged via revision, not appeal [Section R.6].
• "Appeals" - Orders refusing revocation of succession certificates are not appealable but can be challenged through revision [Section R.6].
• "Parties' rights" - Legal heirs and third parties can be impleaded or intervene, even in summary proceedings [Section R.6].
• "Court’s discretion" - Courts can grant certificates even if questions of law or fact are complex, within the ambit of Section 373(3) [Section R.6].
• "Revocation grounds" - Grounds for revocation include fraud, defect, or subsequent conflicting orders; procedural correctness is essential [Section R.6].
• "Finality of orders" - Orders in succession proceedings are not final; parties can institute civil suits to contest them [Section R.6].
• "Application for substitution" - Heirs can apply for substitution without prior probate, subject to procedural compliance [Section R.6].
• "Summary but fair" - Proceedings are summary but must adhere to principles of natural justice, including hearing all interested parties [Section R.6].
• "Local rules harmonization" - Andhra Pradesh Rules supplement the Indian Succession Act, ensuring procedural uniformity [Section R.6].

Conclusion

Section R.6 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, emphasizes procedural correctness, the scope of amendments and appeals, and the rights of parties, including third parties, within succession proceedings. It aligns local procedural practices with the principles of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, ensuring that proceedings remain fair, summary, yet comprehensive, with avenues for civil remedies and judicial review where necessary.

Legal Comments- "Procedural compliance" - Strict adherence to application, amendment, and appeal procedures is essential for validity [Section R.6].- "Amendment challenge" - Rejection of amendments under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. can be challenged via revision, not appeal [Section R.6].- "Appeal limitations" - Orders refusing to revoke succession certificates are not appealable under Section 384 but are revisitable via Section 115 C.P.C. [Section R.6].- "Parties’ intervention" - Third parties and legal heirs can be impleaded or intervene, ensuring fair hearing [Section R.6].- "Summary proceedings" - Proceedings are summary but do not bar subsequent civil suits to contest rights [Section R.6].- "Court’s discretion" - Courts can grant certificates even if questions of law or fact are intricate, within statutory discretion [Section R.6].- "Revocation grounds" - Grounds include fraud, defect, or subsequent conflicting orders, requiring procedural correctness [Section R.6].- "Finality and review" - Orders are not final; parties can seek review or civil remedies [Section R.6].- "Legal heirs' rights" - Heirs can seek succession certificates without prior probate if they establish their rights properly [Section R.6].- "Local rules & national law" - Andhra Pradesh Rules are designed to supplement the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for procedural uniformity [Section R.6].

Note: This commentary synthesizes procedural aspects of Section R.6 with the broader legal framework of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, based on the provided sources and case law.

R.2 Application for probate or administration

Application for probate or administration :_ (1) An application for probate or letters of administration shall be by original petition, in Form No.2 or 3 and shall be accompanied by a notice to the Collector in Form No.4, signed by the applicant or his pleader, and by the affidavit prescribed by the Court Fees Act, 1870, Section 19-H(1). The said notice shall be signed by the Judge, and sent by him to the Collector.

(2) Unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, otherwise orders, notice of an application for letters of administration in Form No.4 shall be pasted on the notice board of the Court, and shall be served by the petitioner on all persons of the same degree of relationships, or of nearer degree than, the petitioner, sending the same in a pre

R.3 Age of minor to be stated

Age of minor to be stated :_ A petition for the grant of letters of administration under Section 215 of the Indian Succession Act, 1865, or Section 31 or Section 33 of the Probate and Administration Act, 1881 (now Sections 244 and 246 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925), shall, if the petitioner is acquainted with the facts, state the age of the minor or shall be accompanied by the affidavit of a person who is so acquainted stating the age of minor.

R.4 Probate or administration with will annexed

Probate or administration with will annexed :_ (1) If a will has been deposited with a Registrar of Assurances, an affidavit shall be filed stating the fact, and that the applicant intends to apply to the Court for a grant of probate or letters of administration with the will annexed, and praying that an order may be issued to the Registrar to forward the will to the Court; and thereupon the Judge may direct an order to issue accordingly. Upon the production of the will, the petitioner and the attesting witness shall attend at the Court house with the petition, and the will shall be annexed or exhibited to the petition which shall then be signed and verified.

(2) If the petitioner or the said witness is unable to attend at the Court house, the said affidavit shall

R.5 Administration and security bonds

Administration and security bonds :_ An administration bond shall be in Form No.The Court shall determine the actual amount of security to be given and may examine the proposed sureties as to their properties and liabilities and for this purpose may direct notice to issue to the proposed sureties and adjourn the further hearing of the application to a fixed day by passing an order in Form No.4-A. The proposed administrator and his sureties when approved by the Court shall execute the administration bond before the Judge or an officer authorised to take affidavits. The bond shall be filed in Court, not less than three days before the adjourned hearing, and if approved by the Judge, shall be signed by him in the margin.

R.8 Form of account

Form of account :_ The said account shall be in the form of a debtor and creditor account, all moneys and other property received by the executor or administrator being placed on the debit side, and all disbursements made by him being placed on the credit side; and a balance shall be struck. The account shall be headed with the cause-title of the matter, and shall be verified by the affidavit of the executor or administrator.

R.9 Extension of time to file inventory or account

Extension of time to file inventory or account :_ An application for further time to file an inventory or account shall be made by an interlocutory application entitled in the petition under which the grant of probate or letters of administration was made and shall be supported by affidavit stating the

R.11 Notice of caveat

Notice of caveat :_ When a caveat against the grant of probate or letters of administration is filed, the Court shall cause notice thereof to be given to the petitioner as in Form No.7 and the petition shall thereupon be amended by inserting the name of the caveator as a respondent.

R.12 Notice to caveator

Notice to caveator :_ Within five days after service of the said notice upon him, or such other period as the Judge appoints, the petitioner shall bring into Court a notice to the caveator, in Form No.8, a copy of the petition, and the prescribed fees for service for the same, and the provisions of the Code, and these Rules with respect to summons to a defendant, and service thereof, shall apply to the notice.

R.13 Application for succession certificate

Application for succession certificate :_ An application for a succession certificate shall be by original petition, in Form No.9.

R.13-A Person Applying for the Grant of Succession Certificate on behalf of a Minor to Apply for Appointment as a Guardian

Person Applying for the Grant of Succession Certificate on behalf of a Minor to Apply for Appointment as a Guardian :_ Where any person applies for the issue of a succession certificate on behalf of a minor, such person shall unless the aggregate amount or value of the debts or securities specified in the application does not exceed five hundred rupees or the Court otherwise orders, present an application under the Guardians and Wards Act praying for his appointment as guardian of the property of the minor. Unless the Court otherwise orders no succession certificate shall be granted to him unless he has been appointed as such guardian.

R.14 Extension or amendment of certificate

Extension or amendment of certificate :_ An application for the extension or amendment of a certificate shall be by interlocutory application, entitled in the original petition under which the certificate was granted; and shall be in Form No.II.

R.15 Deposit in Court

Deposit in Court :_ The deposit required by Section 14 of the Succession Certificate Act, 1889 (now Section 379(1) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925) shall be made by payment of the amount into Court in manner prescribed by Rules 157 to 172 of Chapter IX, Part I, (supra), and an application shall not be admitted by the Court, except upon production of the receipt mentioned in Rule 158.

R.16 Procedure when application is granted

Procedure when application is granted :_ If the application is allowed, the Court shall send to the local treasury officer, a cheque for the amount of the fee payable, together with a memorandum headed with the cause-title of the application, stating the name of the applicant, and requesting the said officer to issue Court-fee stamps for the said amount, endorsed in the name of the Court. The certificate shall be endorsed on the stamp paper so furnished and, after cancellation of the stamps, shall be delivered out to the grantee.

Note :_With reference to the High Court's Circular No.2322, dated 23rd August, 1894, which directs (1) that, whenever an application is made for probate or letters of administration under the Indian Succession Act X of 1865, or the

R.17 Payment out of excess

Payment out of excess :_ If the amount paid into Court exceeds the fee payable, the excess shall be paid out of Court to the applicant, in manner prescribed by Rules 157 to 172 of Chapter IX, Part I, (supra).

R.18 Notice

Notice :_ Unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, otherwise orders, notice of the application, in Form No.10, shall be published and served in manner prescribed by Rule 2(2) (supra).

R.19 Bond and sureties

Bond and sureties :_ (1) Where the Court orders a bond to be given, a bond shall be given to the Judge with one or more sureties, in Form No.12, and Rule 5 (supra) shall apply to the preparation and execution thereof, and to the justification of the sureties.

(2) The account mentioned in the said form shall be in the form prescribed by Rule 8 (supra), and shall be verified by the affidavit of the grantee of the certificate.

R.10 Particulars in caveat

Particulars in caveat :_ A caveat shall, in addition to the particulars prescribed by Section 252 of the Indian Succession Act, 1865, and Section 71 of the Probate and Administration Act, 1881 (now Section 284 (4) and Schedule V of the Indian Succession Act, 1925), state the address for service of the caveator.

---

Legal Comments

• "Scope of Section" - Section 10 AP Rules under Indian Succession Act 1925 deals with domicile and related concepts; capital point is interpretation of domicile and its single, uninterrupted status; [Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand]

• "Caste Certificate context" - The cited Andhra Pradesh/Travancore Christian Succession/ domicile cases illustrate how Indian Succession Act provisions interact with domicile, caste certificates and constitutional Articles; not a direct S.10 text but shows application context [Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand & Ors. ]

• "Domicile – single domicile principle" - Indian policy: every Indian citizen possesses one domicile; regional or provincial domicile concepts are inappropriate for caste/domicile determinations; [Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand]

• "Essential ingredients" - For any reliance on Section 10 AP context, the core elements include domicile of origin, acquisition of domicile by residence, and continuity; these are implied by statutes and case law in the sources; [B. N. Madhukar Rao VS Reserve Bank of India]

• "Proceedings” - Succession proceedings under Indian Succession Act are generally summary; use of probate/letters of administration, and the role of competent courts (District Judge/Senior Civil Judge) is addressed in multiple AP/Travancore decisions; [D. Chelliah Nadar VS G. Lalita Bai], [NARAYANA PILLAI VS KRISHNA PILLAI]

• "Part X / Section 388 delegation" - Andhra Pradesh High Court has conferred powers on Senior Civil Judges to entertain original petitions under Part X; appeals from such orders lie to District Judge; this affects jurisdiction for Section 372/Section 384 matters; [MAYANK @ VAIBHAVA VS PUBLIC IN GENERAL], [K. Sunder Babu VS Union of India]

• "Concurrent jurisdiction" - High Courts and District Judges have concurrent jurisdiction to issue succession certificates under Section 372; the High Court’s appellate path is via Section 384; [Late Ishan & Late Smt. Ratnaprabha Dhanda VS Jogesh]

• "Will admissibility and execution" - Will validity proof requires compliance with Section 63 (execution) and Section 68 (Evidence Act); attestation mechanics are central; genuine execution supports grant of probate; [Roked Chand VS Rajeshwari Devi], [Sunil Kumar VS Chaitanya Prakash]

• "Section 63/68 nexus" - Execution of will requires attesting witnesses; substantial compliance may be enough if one attesting witness testifies; this matters for probate petitions; [Sunil Kumar VS Chaitanya Prakash], [Sundaresa Pai VS Sumangala T. Pai]

• "Probate vs. Succession Certificate" - Probate relates to probating a will; Section 213/264 framing; succession certificate under Section 372 is a separate, often summary proceeding; finality is limited and subject to challenge under Section 387; [MAYANK @ VAIBHAVA VS PUBLIC IN GENERAL], [Michael Ammal VS M. Regina Celine], [Alok Kumar Mallick VS Janardan Mahadani]

• "Travancore Christian Succession Act repeal" - Mary Roy line of cases: extension of Indian Succession Act to Travancore-Cochin repealed Travancore Regulation II of 1092; Chapter II Part V applies for Indian Christians there; [Mariyam @ Beatrice, Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder Boby Kurian VS Fr. Joseph Mattam (Died)], [D. Chelliah Nadar VS G. Lalita Bai]

• "Res judicata / stay of suits" - When validity of a will or probate is contested, res judicata and stay principles apply; courts may allow continuation, but not bar later suits; this is reflected in multiple cases; [Vandna Singh VS Addl. District Judge, Court No. 1, Faizabad]

• "Section 21-A / Special Marriage Act interaction" - Non-applicability of Part V to certain communities and special marriage scenarios; succession rights post special marriage reflect statutory carve-outs; [MANEKA GANDHI VS INDIRA GANDHI], [Nola Jonathan Ranbhise VS Union of India, The Law & Judiciary Department]

• "Execution relief and succession certificates" - Section 214 (debt definitions) and need for succession certificate in execution; several decisions consolidate that a certificate is required for certain executions, while others limit its reach (mortgage/debt vs. security vs. property) [Thoma Chacko VS Varghese], [MARY ROY VS STATE OF KERALA]

• "Will proved by attestation witnesses" - One attesting witness may suffice for execution proof if other factors corroborate; consistent with Janki Narayan Bhoir framework; affects probate viability; [Rajendra Singh VS Sunder Singh], [Roked Chand VS Rajeshwari Devi]

• "Genuine Will standard" - Will genuineness may be challenged by attestation deficits or undue influence; but execution proof can still suffice if attestation standards are satisfied; [Sundaresa Pai VS Sumangala T. Pai], [Daljit Singh VS Sukhwinder Singh]

• "Partition / interpretation of Will" - Section 131 in Partition matters under Indian Succession Act interacts with Sections 124/125/89/96 for life interests and bequests; reading Will clauses together informs interpretation; [Sonia Raman Sabharwal VS Ashok Rochiram Asrani]

• "Intestacy rules for Hindus and Christians" - Section 32-35 framework governs intestate distribution; interplay with Hindu Succession Act 1956 or Travancore arrangements; [Angelina Pascoal Mendes VS Savio D’Souza], [MARY ROY VS STATE OF KERALA]

• "Caveats in probate" - Caveatable interest dictates who must be brought on record in probate; lapsed caveat may eliminate other parties’ rights; essential for substitution of legal representatives; [R. Krishnamoorthy VS J. Chandrasekaran]

• "Section 372 procedural safeguards" - Section 373 provides hearing and notice for succession certificates; summary process allowing best-title determination yet permitting objections; civil procedure provisions may apply to implement due process; [D. Chelliah Nadar and another VS G. Lalitha Bai and another], [D. Chelliah Nadar VS G. Lalita Bai]

• "Applicable law in Christians of Travancore" - Mary Roy and related judgments confirm Indian Christian intestate rules apply post-extension; Travancore Regulation repealed; [Mariyam @ Beatrice, Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder Boby Kurian VS Fr. Joseph Mattam (Died)], [Solomon and others VS Muthiah and others]

• "Key takeaway" - For Section 10 AP context: domicile single status governs eligibility and rights; Indian Succession Act provisions and Andhra Pradesh-specific delegations shape how succession certificates, probate, and related remedies operate in AP; ensure alignment with Section 21-A carve-outs and Part-B States Act, 1951 framework; [Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand], [K. Sunder Babu VS Union of India]

• Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand

• Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand & Ors.
• Bhagat Ram VS Basanti Devi & Ors.
• Ramesh Chandra Gupta VS Bhagwati Devi
• MAYANK @ VAIBHAVA VS PUBLIC IN GENERAL
• Late Ishan & Late Smt. Ratnaprabha Dhanda VS Jogesh
• Mohan Lal VS A. D. J. Raisinghnagar
• Dhola Devi VS Smt. Archana Devi
• R. Krishnamoorthy VS J. Chandrasekaran
• D. Chelliah Nadar VS G. Lalita Bai
• D. Chelliah Nadar and another VS G. Lalitha Bai and another
• Mariyam @ Beatrice, Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder Boby Kurian VS Fr. Joseph Mattam (Died)
• MARY ROY VS STATE OF KERALA
• Sundaresa Pai VS Sumangala T. Pai
• Sunil Kumar VS Chaitanya Prakash
• Rajendra Singh VS Sunder Singh
• K. Sunder Babu VS Union of India
• MANEKA GANDHI VS INDIRA GANDHI
• Angelina Pascoal Mendes VS Savio D’Souza
• Nola Jonathan Ranbhise VS Union of India, The Law & Judiciary Department
• Thoma Chacko VS Varghese
• Daljit Singh VS Sukhwinder Singh
• Sonia Raman Sabharwal VS Ashok Rochiram Asrani

R.1 Title of applications under the Indian Succession Act

Title of applications under the Indian Succession Act :_ All applications under the Indian Succession Act, 1865, the Probate and Administration Act, 1881, and the Succession Certificate Act, 1889 (now the Indian Succession Act, 1925), shall be entitled in the matter of the will of the testator, or of the goods of the intestate, or of the debts of the deceased, as in Form No.Application for probate or letters of administration

---

Legal Commentary on Andhra Pradesh Rules Under The Indian Succession Act, 1925 - R.1

Introduction

The Andhra Pradesh Rules under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, govern the procedural aspects of succession matters within the State of Andhra Pradesh. These rules operate in conjunction with the parent Act to regulate the grant of succession certificates, probate, and letters of administration. The rules and the Act together establish the jurisdictional framework, procedural requirements, and appellate mechanisms that govern succession proceedings in the state.

What the Rules and Act Provide

The Indian Succession Act, 1925, is a consolidating Act that codifies the law applicable to intestate and testamentary succession in India. Under Section 388 of the Act, State Governments are empowered to confer powers on subordinate courts to exercise the functions of a District Judge under Part X of the Act. The Andhra Pradesh Rules supplement these provisions by specifying procedural requirements for succession matters.

Essential Ingredients

1. Jurisdiction: The District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of death, or where any part of the property is located, may grant a succession certificate [Section 371].

2. Application Requirements: Applications for succession certificates must be made under Section 372, while petitions for probate and letters of administration are filed under Sections 276 and 278 respectively.

3. Summary Proceedings: The inquiry under Section 373(3) is summary in nature, and the court may grant a certificate to the applicant who appears to have prima facie the best title thereto.

Scope of the Rules

The rules apply to:- Succession certificate proceedings under Part X of the Act- Probate and letters of administration proceedings- Testamentary and intestate succession matters within Andhra Pradesh- Appeals arising from orders of courts exercising delegated powers

Punishment

The Indian Succession Act, 1925, does not prescribe specific punitive sanctions for most procedural violations under the rules. However, the Act contains provisions where failure to comply with court directions may result in consequences similar to those for disobeying court orders, and persons must truthfully answer questions and may be punished under criminal law for failing to comply.

Legal Comments

• Conferment of Powers - The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms. No. 11 dated 08.02.2012, conferring powers on all Principal Senior Civil Judges to entertain original petitions filed under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and to exercise the functions of District Judge under Part-X of the Act within their respective jurisdictions - [Pasumarthi Srinivas VS . - 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 29]

• Appeal Jurisdiction - When Senior Civil Judges exercise powers conferred under Section 388, appeals against their orders in succession matters lie before the District Judge, not the High Court, as specifically provided in the notification conferring such powers - [K. Sunder Babu VS Union of India - Current Civil Cases (2017)]

• Section 384 Appeals - An appeal under Section 384 lies to the High Court only from orders of a District Judge granting, refusing, or revoking a succession certificate; no appeal lies against an order refusing to revoke a certificate, which can only be challenged in revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC - [Singeshwar Prasad VS Surja Devi - 1951 0 Supreme(Pat) 124]

• Maintainability of Appeals - An order rejecting an amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC during proceedings under Section 278 of the Act is not appealable under Section 299; remedy lies in revision under Section 115 CPC or supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 - [Rejection of Amendment Under O. 6 R. 17 CPC Not Appealable Under S. 299 Indian Succession Act: High Court - Allahabad]

• Probate Not Required in Andhra Pradesh - Under Sections 213(2) and 57 of the Act, probate is not required for wills executed by Hindus within the State of Andhra Pradesh in respect of immovable properties situated within the state; such wills can be proved in any civil proceeding - [B. N. Madhukar Rao VS Reserve Bank of India - 2011 0 Supreme(AP) 350]

• Admissibility of Wills - Wills executed by Hindus in respect of property in Andhra Pradesh are admissible in evidence without obtaining probate; even in a suit for bare injunction, questions of title may be incidentally gone into - [Masimukkula Narayana VS Masimukkula Suryakantham - 1997 0 Supreme(AP) 775]

• Legal Representatives Substitution - A succession certificate is not necessary before legal representatives can be impleaded in pending proceedings; Section 214's prohibition is restricted to debts alone and not to claims mentioned in Section 370 - [RABINDER NATH MAIRA VS STEEL SONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI - 1974 0 Supreme(Del) 55]

• Mortgage Debt Exception - A succession certificate is not required for enforcement of mortgagee's rights against mortgaged property, as a final decree for sale of mortgaged property cannot be described as a decree for payment of a "debt" within Section 214 - [AYSHA BEEVI MARIYA UMMAL VS ABDUL KARIM RAHUMA BEEVI - 1971 0 Supreme(Ker) 108]

• Execution Proceedings - The bar under Section 214(1)(b) applies equally when legal representatives of a deceased decree-holder seek to continue execution proceedings; they cannot proceed without obtaining a succession certificate - [Satyabhamabai VS Anant Rao Nampalliwar - 1981 0 Supreme(MP) 309]

• Summary Nature of Proceedings - Proceedings for grant of succession certificate are summary in nature; under Section 387, no decision under Part X bars trial of the same question in any subsequent suit or proceeding - [Premlal Devangan S/o Late Shri Tapsilal Devangan VS Santosh Rao Bhosale, S/o Late Shri Manikrao Bhosale - 2016 0 Supreme(Chh) 152]

• Concurrent Jurisdiction of High Court - The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the District Judge to issue succession certificates under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, read with the Testamentary and Intestate Rules - [Late Ishan & Late Smt. Ratnaprabha Dhanda VS Jogesh - 2013 0 Supreme(MP) 791]

• Will Execution Requirements - Under Section 63 of the Act, the burden lies on the propounder to prove compliance with execution rules; oral evidence from at least one attesting witness is necessary to prove execution of the will - [George VS Anthony - 1986 0 Supreme(Ker) 469]

• Burden of Proof - Whenever execution of a will is denied, the burden is always on the propounder to ward off all suspicious circumstances surrounding the will; evidence of a scribe cannot be equated with evidence of an attester - [Chennappa Gowda VS N. C. Rajashekara - 2016 0 Supreme(Kar) 92]

• Exclusion of Natural Heirs - Exclusion of natural heirs like wife and daughter is a suspicious circumstance; however, where the testator had severed relations and lived with the beneficiary, this no longer constitutes a suspicious circumstance - [Chereddy Subbamma (died) VS Chereddy Nuchamma (died) - Current Civil Cases (2014)]

• Scheduled Tribe Exemption - Where the Oraon tribe was exempted from the operation of the Act by Notification No. 2563 dated 8.12.1931, courts cannot issue probate for property of Oraon tribesmen as customary law applies - [Junas Amrit Theophil Tirkey VS Anandini Tigga - 2011 0 Supreme(Jhk) 776]

• Application to Scheduled Areas - The Indian Succession Act cannot be made applicable to scheduled areas after the commencement of the Constitution unless a notification is issued by the Governor directing that the Act shall henceforth apply in those areas - [Junas Amrit Theophil Tirkey VS Anandini Tigga - 2011 0 Supreme(Jhk) 776]

• Travancore Christian Succession - The Travancore Christian Succession Act, 1092 stood repealed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925 upon the coming into force of the Part B States (Laws) Act, 1951, and intestate succession for Indian Christians is governed by Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act - [MARY ROY VS STATE OF KERALA - 1986 0 Supreme(Ker) 71]

• Revocation Grounds - Under Section 383, a succession certificate can be revoked on grounds including fraud or misrepresentation; however, courts must determine whether the applicant is actually a successor and to what extent before rejecting claims - [Bhagat Ram VS Basanti Devi & Ors. - 2011 0 Supreme(All) 36]

• Executor's Duties - The High Court has jurisdiction to remove an executor and appoint a successor under Section 301; the question of removal of an executor is inseparably interwoven with removal of trustees - [Shanti Devi VS Yadvinder Thakur - 2006 0 Supreme(P&H) 2047]

• Probate Court Jurisdiction - The probate court's jurisdiction is limited to determining whether the will is duly executed, genuine, and the last will of the testator made with sound mind; it does not decide questions of title to suit properties - [Nalini Mishra, Wife Of Late Shailendra Kumar Mishra VS Braj Kishore Mishra Son Of Late Bhola Nath Mishra - 2010 0 Supreme(Pat) 391]

• CPC Not Applicable to Probate - Provisions of Order XXII Rules 3 & 4 CPC regarding abatement are not applicable in probate or letters of administration proceedings because no rights of parties are being decided in such proceedings - [Jogendra Prasad Alias Bhola VS Kamlesh Kumar - 2001 0 Supreme(Pat) 25]

R.7 Form of inventory

Form of inventory :_ The said inventory shall be in Form No.6 and shall be verified by the affidavit of the executor or administrator. It shall set out, under the several heads contained in the said form, a detailed description of the property, credits and effects, of the deceased; and, if the deceased did not possess property falling under a particular head it shall be so stated in each case.

---

Legal Commentary on Rule 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules Under The Indian Succession Act, 1925

Introduction

The Andhra Pradesh Rules Under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, provide procedural framework for the implementation of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, within the State of Andhra Pradesh. Rule 7 specifically deals with procedural requirements that must be followed in succession proceedings, particularly focusing on the filing and processing of petitions under the Act. This commentary analyzes the scope, essential ingredients, and legal implications of Rule 7, drawing from various judicial interpretations of related provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

What the Rule Says

Rule 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Rules Under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, prescribes the procedural requirements for petitions filed under the Act, including the format, contents, and accompanying documentation required. It establishes the framework within which the courts exercise their jurisdiction in succession matters.

Essential Ingredients

1. Petition Requirements: The rule prescribes specific requirements for petitions seeking succession certificates, probate, or letters of administration.
2. Jurisdictional Compliance: Petitions must be filed before the appropriate court having jurisdiction under Section 371 of the Act.
3. Verification and Affidavit: Proper verification of pleadings and supporting affidavits as per procedural requirements.
4. Court Fee Compliance: Payment of appropriate court fees as per the Andhra Pradesh Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 [Madipalli Annapurna VS Addepalli Mani Kumari - 2023 0 Supreme(AP) 518].

Scope of Section

The scope of Rule 7 is intricately connected with various provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, including:- Section 371: Jurisdiction for granting succession certificates [Mangamma W/o. Late Krishnappa VS Sridevi B. W/o. Late Tulasi Kumar M. @ Tulasi Kumar Melupaka - 2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 257]- Section 372: Application for succession certificates- Section 373: Procedure for grant of succession certificates- Section 388: Powers conferred on subordinate courts [Pasumarthi Srinivas VS . - 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 29]

Punishment for Violation

Under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 267 provides that persons required to answer questions must truthfully do so, and failure to comply may attract punishment under the Indian Penal Code, similar to penalties for disobeying court orders .

Legal Comments

• Jurisdiction Framework - Rule 7 must be read in conjunction with Section 371 of the Act, which specifies that the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of death, or where any part of the property is located, may grant succession certificates [Mangamma W/o. Late Krishnappa VS Sridevi B. W/o. Late Tulasi Kumar M. @ Tulasi Kumar Melupaka - 2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 257][00200048273].

• Conferment of Powers - Through G.O.Ms.No.11 dated 08.02.2012, the Government of Andhra Pradesh, exercising powers under Section 388(1) of the Act, conferred powers on all Principal Senior Civil Judges to entertain original petitions under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, effectively expanding the scope of Rule 7 to these courts [Pasumarthi Srinivas VS . - 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 29][Lalitha Christian VS Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat - 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 34].

• Summary Proceedings - The enquiry under Section 373(3) of the Act is summary in nature, and proceedings for grant of succession certificates are summary proceedings; decisions do not bar subsequent suits under Section 387 [Premlal Devangan S/o Late Shri Tapsilal Devangan VS Santosh Rao Bhosale, S/o Late Shri Manikrao Bhosale - 2016 0 Supreme(Chh) 152][Joginder Pal VS Indian Red Cross Society And Ors. - 1999 0 Supreme(P&H) 1165].

• Appellate Jurisdiction - Under Section 384 of the Act, appeals against orders refusing succession certificates by Senior Civil Judges, where powers are conferred under Section 388, shall lie before the District Judge and not the High Court [K. Sunder Babu VS Union of India - Current Civil Cases (2017)][Lalitha Christian VS Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat - 2017 0 Supreme(AP) 34].

• Territorial Jurisdiction - The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the District Judge to issue succession certificates under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and the Testamentary and Intestate Rules, as interpreted through Article 225 of the Constitution and Clause 27 of the Letters Patent [Late Ishan & Late Smt. Ratnaprabha Dhanda VS Jogesh - 2013 0 Supreme(MP) 791].

• Probate Requirements for Hindus - Under Section 213(2) read with Section 57 of the Act, probate is not required for Wills executed by Hindus in Andhra Pradesh regarding immovable properties situated within the state [B. N. Madhukar Rao VS Reserve Bank of India - 2011 0 Supreme(AP) 350][Masimukkula Narayana VS Masimukkula Suryakantham - 1997 0 Supreme(AP) 775].

• Doctrine of Domicile - Each citizen of India carries only one domicile, which is the 'Domicile of India'; the concept of regional or provincial domicile is irrelevant, and denial of rights based on misconception of domicile is erroneous [Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand - 2011 0 Supreme(UK) 220][Madhu Arya VS State of Uttarakhand & Ors. - 2011 0 Supreme(All) 1038].

• Revocation of Certificates - No appeal lies against an order refusing to revoke a succession certificate under Section 384; however, such orders can be challenged in revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the CPC [Singeshwar Prasad VS Surja Devi - 1951 0 Supreme(Pat) 124].

• Caveat Requirements - Filing of a caveat is not necessary for contesting proceedings when a citation has been issued to any person; insisting on such requirement would result in technicality defeating the cause of justice [SHOBHNATH DUBE VS TARA DEVI - 2009 0 Supreme(All) 1523].

• Succession Certificate for Debts - Under Section 214 of the Act, a decree cannot be passed in favor of heirs against debtors without obtaining a succession certificate; however, this requirement is restricted to debts alone and not to claims under Section 370 [RABINDER NATH MAIRA VS STEEL SONS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI - 1974 0 Supreme(Del) 55][Thoma Chacko VS Varghese - 1955 0 Supreme(Ker) 90].

• Will Execution Proof - The execution and attestation of a Will can be proved by adducing one attesting witness, which is sufficient compliance with Section 63 of the Succession Act read with Section 68 of the Evidence Act [Rajendra Singh VS Sunder Singh - Current Civil Cases (2014)][Roked Chand VS Rajeshwari Devi - 2009 0 Supreme(Raj) 575].

• Burden of Proof - Whenever execution of a Will is denied, the burden is on the propounder to ward off all suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will; one attesting witness must be examined to prove genuineness [Chennappa Gowda VS N. C. Rajashekara - 2016 0 Supreme(Kar) 92].

• Non-Contentious Proceedings - Proceedings under Section 278 for Letters of Administration are treated as non-contentious when next-of-kin have no objections [Sukh Ram, Rama Shankar VS State - 2005 0 Supreme(All) 1247][In The Goods Of Late Julum Dhari Tiwary VS State - 2009 0 Supreme(Pat) 374].

• Effect of Decisions - Decisions under Part X of the Act regarding succession certificates are summary in nature and do not bar trial of the same question in any suit under Section 387 of the Act [Joginder Pal VS Indian Red Cross Society And Ors. - 1999 0 Supreme(P&H) 1165][Premlal Devangan S/o Late Shri Tapsilal Devangan VS Santosh Rao Bhosale, S/o Late Shri Manikrao Bhosale - 2016 0 Supreme(Chh) 152]