Disposed

Smt. Kunjamma v. Nil

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2021MFA/8293/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of the first appeal filed under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act. The Court granted liberty to the appellants to file a fresh petition for a succession certificate, allowing them to cure the defects regarding documentation noted by the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to appellants to file a fresh petition for succession certificate under Section 278 to cure procedural defects.

Smt. Kunjamma Vs Nil — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8293 OF 2019 (ISA)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT.KUNJAMMA WIFE OF ANTONY E.S. AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS

¶11

SRI.ANIL KUMAR SON OF ANTONY E.S. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

¶12

SRI.SUNIL KUMAR SON OF ANTONY E.S. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

¶13

THE APPELLANTS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.20, MORING STAR BEHIND GANGAMMA TEMPLE COCONUT GARDEN JALAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 013.

¶14

... APPELLANTS

¶15

(BY SRI:LOURDU MARIYAPPA A., ADVOCATE (PH))

AND:

NIL

… RESPONDENT

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 299 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.03.2019 PASSED IN P & SC NO.422 OF 2018, ON THE FILE OF THE LXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-65), DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 278 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925.

¶21

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

J U D G M E N T

¶23

The appellants herein were petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 4 in P & S.C.No.422 of 2018, petitioner No.2 in the said proceedings has since died. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of their petition filed under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for the sake of brevity), by order dated 12/03/2019 by the LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru in the aforesaid case, this appeal has been filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellants contended

¶25

that the appellants herein had filed the petition under Section 278 of the Act seeking Succession Certificate on account of the death of Binil Anthony, son of appellant

¶26

¶27

No.1 and brother of appellant Nos.2 and 3 herein. The Trial Court has dismissed the said petition stating that adequate documents were not produced in support of the prayer for Succession Certificate to be granted to them. He submitted that this Court may either permit the appellants to amend the petition filed by them and thereafter remand the matter to the Trial Court for fresh consideration or, in the alternative, permit the appellants herein to file the fresh petition under Section 278 of the Act seeking the prayer for grant of Succession Certificate.

¶28

We have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants in light of the impugned order and we find that the Trial Court has noted that the petition was bereft of details and therefore, sufficient oral and documentary evidence were also not produced so as to be entitled to the grant of Succession Certificate under Section 278 of the Act.

¶29

In the circumstances, we dispose the appeal by reserving liberty to the appellants herein to file fresh

¶30

¶31

petition in order to seek grant of Succession Certificate in accordance with law.

¶32

It is needless to observe that after such petition is filed, the appellants will ensure that the defects found by the Trial Court in the present petition shall be make good. It is also observed that, if the appellants herein file the fresh petition under Section 278 of the Act, the same shall be considered and disposed in accordance with law and without reference to the impugned order, which shall not come in the way of the disposal of the fresh petition to be filed.

¶33

Ordered accordingly.

¶34

In view of the disposal of the appeal, IA.2 of 2019

¶35

filed for permission to amend the appeal is ordered to be filed.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

*bgn/-

Smt. Kunjamma v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kunjamma v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri G.R.Govindaraju Vs Bangalore Water Supply

A Mukund Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. F.H.Lamani Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Shrividya K S Vs Sri Dilip H R

Mr.Manohar Vs Mrs. Yogeshwari

Mr Manohar Vs Mrs Yogeshwari