Dismissed¶34

Durga Prasad Sao, v. Smt Budhara Bai

Chhattisgarh HC7 May 2026CR/119/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court civil revision dismissed at admission stage (CR No. 119 of 2026, order dated 08/05/2026, Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi). Key terms: succession certificate; Section 372 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1976 (as cited in the text); Class-I legal heirs (widow, two daughters, son); Will deed dated 18.02.2021 (Annexure-P/5) silent on bank deposit; savings Account No. 624042072429, District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Bhatapara; Rs. 5,41,490/- balance; Succession Case No. 03/2022; Misc. Civil Appeal No.08/2024; joint entitlement of legal heirs affirmed; applicant's claim of sole right rejected; pending applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicant: the Civil Revision failed and was dismissed at the admission stage itself; pending application(s), if any, disposed of. ¶34

Durga Prasad Sao, Vs Smt Budhara Bai — Succession and Inheritance | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the applicant: the Civil Revision failed and was dismissed at the admission stage itself; pending application(s), if any, disposed of.

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is solely entitled to the succession certificate in respect of the amount in his late father Malluram Sao's savings account on the strength of the Will deed dated 18.02.2021 executed in his favour, notwithstanding that he and Respondents No. 1 to 3 are the deceased's legal heirs.

¶27

Court's answer

Respondent No.1 Smt. Budhara Bai is the widow, Respondents No.2 and 3 the daughters, and the Petitioner the son of late Malluram Sao; as such they are his Class-I legal heirs, and it is undisputed that Rs.5,41,490/- remains in his savings account at District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Bhatapara after his death.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The Will deed dated 18.02.2021 (Annexure-P/5) does not support the claim of sole entitlement: it speaks only of a house situated at Bhatapara and agricultural land at Village Hathni, and is completely silent regarding the distribution of the subject bank deposit.

¶32

Key takeaways

The learned Civil Court and the learned Appellate Court committed no error of law in holding that the Petitioner and Respondents No. 1 to 3, being legal heirs, are jointly entitled to a succession certificate in respect of the subject amount; accordingly the Revision fails.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision (CR No. 119 of 2026), High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; decided 08/05/2026 by Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi. Applicant Durga Prasad Sao challenged the judgment dated 19.03.2026 of the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhatapara (Misc. Civil Appeal No.08/2024), which upheld the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhatapara's order dated 30.08.2024 (Succession Case No. 03/2022) directing issuance of a succession certificate over late Malluram Sao's bank balance of Rs. 5,41,490/- jointly in favour of the applicant and Respondents No. 1 to 3 (his mother Budhara Bai and sisters Parvati Sahu and Radha Bai). The Court held that the widow, daughters and son are Class-I legal heirs of the deceased; that the Will deed dated 18.02.2021 relied upon by the applicant covers only a house at Bhatapara and agricultural land at Village Hathni and is completely silent about the bank deposit; and that therefore the courts below committed no error of law in holding the heirs jointly entitled. The Revision was dismissed at the admission stage itself and pending applications disposed of.

2026:CGHC:21525

NAFR

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CR No. 119 of 2026

¶7

Durga Prasad Sao, S/o- Late Malluram Sao, Aged About 63 Years R/oMahavir Ward, Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapar, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)

¶8

... Applicant.

¶9

Versus

¶10

1 - Smt Budhara Bai W/o- Late Malluram Sao, Aged About 79 Years R/oMahavir Ward, Bhatapara, Tahsil-Bharapara. Present Addresh Parmeshwar Singh Sahu, Village- Mehna, Tahsil- Nandgaht, District- Bemetara (C.G.)

¶11

2 - Parvati Sahu, W/o- Parmeshwar Singh Sahu, Aged About 55 Years R/oVillage Mehna, Police Station And Tahsil- Nandghat, District- Bemetara (C.G.)

¶12

3 - Radha Bai, W/o- Dulendra Kumar Sahu, R/o- Village- Nevdha, Tahsil - Tilda, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

4 - General Public And Whosoever Related Nil

¶14

... Respondents.

¶15

(cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery)

¶16

For Applicant	: Mr.	Rajkumar Pali, Advocate.
For Respondents	: -

¶17

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

08/05/2026

¶20

Heard on admission.

¶21

¶22

This Civil Revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 19.03.2026 passed by the learned Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge Bhatapara, District Balodabazar, in Misc. Civil Appeal No.08/2024, whereby it upheld the order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar, in Succession Case No. 03/2022. In that case, a succession certificate was directed to be issued in favour of Respondents No.1 to 3 (Applicants No.1 to 3 therein) and the Petitioner (Non-Applicant No.2 therein) holding them to be legal heirs of the late Malluram Sao son of Ghasiram Sao.

¶23

Facts of the case, in nutshell, are that late Malluram, S/o Ghasiram Sao, opened his account in the District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Bhatapara, having Account No. 624042072429. Late Malluram passed away on 25.04.2021. As on 10.02.2022, Rs. 5,41,490/- was available in his savings account. After the death of late Malluram, his wife Smt. Budhara Bai and his daughters Parvati and Radha Bai filed an application before the learned Civil Court for the grant of a succession certificate under Section 372 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1976 (henceforth the "Act 1976"), and impleaded the General Public and Durga Prasad Sao (Petitioner herein) as respondent parties.

¶24

After hearing the parties and on the basis of the evidence adduced, the learned Civil Court vide order dated 30.08.2024 (Annexure-P/4), allowed the application filed by Respondents No.1 to 3 and held that Respondents No. 1 to 3 (Applicants therein) as well as the Petitioner (Non-Applicant No. 2 therein) are entitled to get a succession certificate. The Court further held that they, being the wife, daughters, and son, are equally entitled for a share of the amount available in the savings account of the late Malluram.

¶25

¶26

Against the aforesaid order, the Petitioner (Non-Applicant No. 2) filed an appeal before the Appellate Court, which was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 19.03.2026 (Annexure-P/1), which is assailed in the instant Civil Revision.

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that late Malluram Sao executed a Will deed on 18.02.2021 (Annexure-P/5) in favour of the petitioner, wherein he bequeathed his movable and immovable property in the petitioner's favour. Therefore, on the strength of the aforesaid Will deed, the petitioner alone is entitled to get the succession certificate in respect of the amount available in the savings account of his father, late Malluram. In support of this contention, counsel also draws the attention of this Court towards the last paragraph of the aforesaid Will and submits that, by the said Will, the petitioner is solely entitled to the aforesaid amount. Hence, he prays to admit this Civil Revision.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the documents available with the case.

¶29

Undisputedly, Respondent No.1 Smt. Budhara Bai is wife of late Malluram Sao. Respondents No.2 and 3 are daughters of the late Malluram Sao, and the Petitioner is his son. As such, they are Class-I legal heirs of the late Malluram. It is also not in dispute that after the death of the late Malluram, Rs.5,41,490/- is available in his savings account at the District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Bhatapara.

¶30

Now, the petitioner is claiming a sole right to the aforesaid amount on the strength of the Will deed dated 18.02.2021 (Annexure-P/5) allegedly executed by his father, late Malluram Sao in his favour. However, a bare perusal of the aforesaid Will it nowhere indicates that the petitioner is solely

¶31

¶32

entitled to the amount available in the savings account of the late Malluram, rather, the aforesaid Will only speaks about a house situated at Bhatapara and agricultural land situated at Village Hathni. The Will is completely silent in respect of the distribution of the subject amount deposited in the District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Branch Bhatapara.

¶33

In view of the aforesaid discussion, in the considered opinion of this Court, learned Civil Court as well as the learned Appellate Court did not commit any error of law in holding that the Petitioner and Respondents No. 1 to 3, being legal heirs, are jointly entitled to get a succession certificate in respect of the subject amount of the late Malluram.

¶34

Accordingly, the Revision fails and is dismissed at the admission stage itself.

¶35

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶38

Ajay

Durga Prasad Sao, v. Smt Budhara Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durga Prasad Sao, v. Smt Budhara Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Fulmani

D. R. Baghmare Vs Shri K.N. Kandey

Pankaj Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gorelal Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Gulshan Netam Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Branch Manager Vs Narayan Prasad Rathore