Allowed

Sri Janardhan Devarajan v. Nil

Karnataka HC9 Mar 2022MFA/2296/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal and set aside an order dismissing a succession certificate petition against a respondent that was merely an imaginary named party. The dismissal resulted from a clerical error or drafting mistake in the petition where the appellant incorrectly stated that 'the respondent herein is not claiming rights.' The court restored the matter to the lower court for disposal a

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, P&S.C. 333/2021 was restored to the lower court file, and the appellant was permitted to amend the petition to make necessary corrections befo

Sri Janardhan Devarajan Vs Nil — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶4

MFA NO.2296 OF 2022 (ISA)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Sri. Janardhan Devarajan, S/o Late C.G.Devaraj, Aged about 47 years, R/a No.8, Bhavani Street, Near T.V.S. Show Room, Ramamurthy Nagar, Bengaluru North, Doorvani Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 016.

¶7

…Appellant

¶8

(By Sri Ganapathy Bhat, Advocate)

AND:

Nil

…Respondent

This MFA is filed under section 384 of the Indian Succession Act against the order dated 29.9.2021 passed in P & S.C. No. 333/2021 on the file of XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH No.27) dismissing the petition filed under section 372 of Indian Succession Act.

¶13

This MFA coming on for admission this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶14

:: 2 ::

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Heard Sri Ganapathy Bhat, learned counsel for the appellant.

¶17

The appellant is petitioner in P & S.C.333/2021 on the file of XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, CCH.27, Bengaluru. The appellant applied for succession certificate under section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for obtaining katha of the immovable properties acquired by his father and to claim an amount of Rs.41,41,296.41 available in the S.B account of his father at State Bank of India. In the petition for succession certificate, no respondent was impleaded and as per the directions of the court below, he took out citation in two newspapers. Nobody appeared before the court and contested the petition. The court below dismissed the petition by referring to the underlined sentence in

¶18

:: 3 ::

¶19

para 10 of the petition for succession certificate. Para 10 reads as below : -

¶20

“10. The petitioner submits that, the father of the petitioner died leaving behind his son petitioner herein. The respondent herein is not claiming any rights over the above said money as the amount deposited in the above said bank is clearly belonging to the petitioner. Subsequent to the death of petitioner father, the petitioner has succeeded the same. “

¶21

The court below understood the underlined

¶22

sentence as though there was a respondent to contest, yet the appellant did not make him a party to the proceeding for probate intentionally in order to avoid the conflict, and therefore dismissed the petition.

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in para 10, it was wrongly typed as “respondent herein is not claiming any rights ……”

¶24

:: 4 ::

¶25

The sentence ought to have been typed as “there is no respondent who is claiming right on the appellant’s properties”. The appellant’s counsel seeks to explain this ambiguity, that it was a mistake committed inadvertently and actually there was no respondent to contest. He further submits that the appellant is the only son to his father and mother and there are no contesting respondents. He further submits that if the case is remanded, he will effect necessary amendment to the petition.

¶26

As per the submission made by the learned counsel, a mere typing mistake or drafting mistake has resulted in dismissal of the petition for probate, the appeal deserves to be allowed for disposal afresh. The appellant may have to amend the petition.

¶27

:: 5 ::

¶28

Therefore, the appeal is allowed, the

¶29

impugned order is set aside. P & S.C. 333/2021 is restored to the file of XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, CCH.27, Bengaluru. The appellant is given permission to amend the petition by making necessary application. If necessary the appellant is permitted to adduce further evidence, the court below shall dispose of the matter thereafter on merits.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

ckl/-

Sri Janardhan Devarajan v. Nil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Janardhan Devarajan 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 Sushanth I Hiremath Vs Smt Nagachitra

Mrs. Halima Sadhiya Vs M G Mohammed Ismail

Sri Vinay Kumar Vs Smt Sumana J M @ Bavya

Sri.G.N. Nagarajaiah Vs Sri Bheemaiah

Sri N Muthurayappa Vs Smt N C Muniyamma

Sri N Muthurayappa Vs Smt N C Muniyamma