Disposed

P U Balachandra Das v. Smt Bhagyalakshmamma

Karnataka HC8 Sept 2021WP/23668/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the Administrator General's grant of letters of administration regarding properties of a deceased. The Court held that the dispute over the extent of the Channakka Dharma Chatra and title must be adjudicated in the pending civil suit. The writ petition was disposed of as subject to that outcome.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of directing parties to seek adjudication of their dispute in the pending civil suit O.S. No.9/2017.

P U Balachandra Das Vs Smt Bhagyalakshmamma — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶6

W.P. NO.23668 OF 2017 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

P.U. BALACHANDRA DAS S/O LATE P.S.UGRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, NAYAKA BY CASTE, R/AT BANASHANKARI LAYOUT, TUMKUR ROAD, PAVAGADA TOWN AND TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572101.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. HARISH H.V., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SMT. BHAGYALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE P.S.RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, GOLLA BY CASTE

¶13

SMT P.R.MANJULA W/O LATE CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, GOLLA BY CASTE

¶14

SMT. R.VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O LATE S.RANGANATH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, GOLLA BY CASTE

¶15

SMT. P.R.JYOTHI D/O LATE P.S.RAMAKRISHNAPPA,

¶16

¶17

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, GOLLA BY CASTE

¶18

SMT. P.R.PARIMALA D/O LATE P.S.RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, GOLLA BY CASTE

¶19

SRI. V.E.SRIDHARA S/O LATE V.R.ESHWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, KURUBA BY CASTE

¶20

ALL ARE R/AT SHANTHI NAGAR, PAVAGADA TOWN AND TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572101.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B.G., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6)

¶23

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 14 OF THE ADMINISTRATORS GENERAL ACT, 1963 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER/ GRANT CERTIFICATE DATED 31.03.1993 GRANTED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR GENERAL IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED SMT.CHINNAKKA OF PAVAGADA IN CA.NO.45/1990 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶24

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the correctness of a grant certificate issued by the Administrator General for State of Karnataka, concerning the properties of deceased Smt. Chinnakka, who died on

¶27

¶28

04.02.1962, thereby authorising her nephew (P.S. Ramakrishna) to administer the properties.

¶29

The petitioner claims that he is the owner of the land bearing Sy. No.74/2 measuring 4 guntas situate in Pavagada Town. He contends that on the northern side of the said property there exists a Channakka Dharma Chatra (Kallu Mantapa). Since the respondents were interfering with the possession of the petitioners, a suit in O.S. No.9/2017 was filed before the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Pavagada for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the land bearing Sy. No.74/2 measuring 4.4 guntas. The petitioner contends that in the said suit, it was stated that the husband of respondent No.1 and the father of respondents No.2 to 5 had obtained letters of administration in respect of the properties allegedly held by Chinnakka which is the Choultry (Kallu Mantapa) by filing a petition under Section 29 of the Administrators General Act, 1963. The petitioner contends that the letters of administration were granted without appropriate notice

¶30

¶31

and without taking into consideration any documentary evidence. He contends that the Administrator General could not have issued letters of administration mentioning the measurement of the property.

¶32

Per contra, the learned counsel for the private respondent submitted that the letters of administration was granted on 31.03.1993 and following the said letters of administration, the revenue records were transferred to the name of said respondents. He contended that since the petitioner has already filed a civil suit, the entitlement of the petitioner to the property bearing Sy. No.74/2 and the measurement of Channakka Dharma Chatra (Kallu Mantapa) on the northern side of the property of the petitioner could very well be considered in the civil suit.

¶33

It is not in dispute that the property of the petitioner is bound on the northern side by Channakka Dharma Chatra (Kallu Mantapa). The predecessor of the private respondents claimed to be the nephew of Smt.Chinnakka and that he had obtained letters of

¶34

¶35

administration in respect of the properties left behind by Smt.Chinnakka which include the Channakka Dharma Chatra (Kallu Mantapa). The only dispute between the petitioner and private respondents relates to the measurement of Channakka Dharma Chatra (Kallu Mantapa) lying on the northern side of the property of the petitioner. The same needs to be thrashed out in the civil suit filed by the petitioner for declaration of title and consequential reliefs. Consequently, the letters of administration (Annexure-A) dated 31.03.1993 granted by the Administrator General in C.A. No.45/1990, though is deemed to be a decree yet it is always subject to the outcome of the proceedings in O.S. No.9/2017. Hence, this writ petition stands disposed off directing the parties to seek adjudication of their dispute in O.S. No.9/2017.

¶36

The impugned order passed by the

¶37

Administrator General shall always be subject to the outcome of the civil suit in O.S. No.9/2017. The Civil Court shall decide the suit independently, based on the

¶38

¶39

oral and documentary evidence placed before it in respect of the suit property. The writ petition stands disposed off. All contentions are left open.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

hnm

P U Balachandra Das v. Smt Bhagyalakshmamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P U Balachandra Das v. Smt Bhagyalakshmamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt N Nagarathna Vs Sri Linganna

Sri a M Gopala Reddy Vs Sri S Venkatarayappa

Smt. B. Nagarathna Vs Smt. Devamma

H L Narayana Shetty Vs the Union of India

Lochanesh B Hugar Vs the Head

M/S. Marian Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka