Disposed

Sultan Mohiuddin v. Aslam Khan Umar

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2023WP/28611/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging succession certificate in P & SC No.1/2015 was disposed of via compromise. Court approved joint memo granting Rs.4L to petitioners and balance to respondents from terminal benefits of deceased teacher.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of based on joint memo; petitioners to receive Rs.4,00,000 and respondents to receive Rs.7,48,945 from total terminal benefits.

Sultan Mohiuddin Vs Aslam Khan Umar — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 28611 OF 2018 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SULTAN MOHIUDDIN S/O DASTAGIR PEERAN AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, R/AT K R PURAM LAYOUT SAMPIGE ROAD, 5TH CROSS, HASSAN, HASSAN DISTTRICT-577001

¶8

NOOR FATHIMA SULTANA D/O SULTANA MOHIUDDIN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT ENGINEER KARNATAKA SLUM DEVELOPMENT BOARD, RISALDAR STREET, SHESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-560 009

¶9

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

MS SALMA SULTANA D/O SULTANA MOHIUDDIN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.59, P.W.D. QUARTERS, KAVALBYRASANDRA BANGALORE-576021

¶11

(BY SRI. V B VIJAY KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

AND:

¶14

ASLAM KHAN UMAR @ PARVEZALAM KHAN AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.18, SIRSI ROAD, CHAMARAJPET BANGALORE-560 018

¶15

JAHED ALI KHAN S/O ASLAM KHAN UMAR

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶17

AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/AT NO.18, SIRSI ROAD, CHAMARAJPET BANGALORE-560 018

¶18

THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001

¶19

THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001

¶20

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001

¶21

THE PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE N H 206, KADUR TOWN, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 578021

¶22

THE DISTRICT INSURANCE OFFICER KARNATAKA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT (KGID) CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT CHIKKAMAGALURU-578021

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI R C NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI RAHUL CARIAPPA, AGA FOR R3 TO R7)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS RELATING TO ISSUE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 5.3.2018 PASSED BY THE LOK ADALAT AND SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC IN P AND SC NO.1/2015 AND AFTER PERUSAL SET ASIDE THE SAME [VIDE ANNEXURE-L] AND ETC.

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶27

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

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The petitioners have sought the following reliefs in this writ petition:-

¶30

(i) to call for records relating to issue of the impugned order dated 05.03.2018 passed by the Lok Adalat and Sr. Civil Judge and JMFC in P & SC No.1/2015 and after perusal set aside the same (vide Annexure - L);

¶31

(ii) to pass such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶32

The petitioner No.1 is the father, while petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the sisters of deceased - Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana, who was working as an Assistant Professor in Hindi in the First Grade College at Kadur Town, Chikkamagalur District. She was diagnosed as suffering from Cancer and she ultimately gave up the fight against the disease and expired on 04.05.2015. The respondent No.1 being the husband and respondent No.2 being the son of Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana had obtained a succession certificate in respect of terminal benefits of Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana in P & SC No.1/2015. The

¶33

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶34

petitioner No.1 claims that he and his daughters had spent enormous amount for the treatment of Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana and therefore they too were entitled to a share in the terminal benefits of Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana and therefore, the succession certificate granted in the name of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 is liable to be set aside as the respondent Nos.1 and 2 did not array the petitioners as parties in the proceeding as mandated under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

¶35

When this petition was listed for 'Preliminary

¶36

Hearing in 'B' Group', the parties have arrived at a settlement in terms of which the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have conceded that a joint P & SC certificate be issued in favour of petitioners and the respondent Nos.1 and 2 so that a sum of Rs.4,00,000/(Rupees Four Lakhs only) could be released in the names of petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and the remaining sum of Rs.7,48,945/(Rupees Seven Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Five only) be released to the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶39

The joint memo reads as follows:-

¶40

"JOINT MEMO FILED BY THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 AND RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2

¶41

The petitioners 1 to 3 and the respondents 1 and 2 submit as follows:

¶42

1. That in the above writ petition the petitioners 1 to 3 and the respondents 1 and 2 are the contesting respondents.

¶43

2. That late Noor Aaisha Sultana was daughter of the first petitioner and sister of petitioners 2 and 3. She was working as a lecturer teaching Hindi language at Government First Grade College Kadur in Chikkamagalur District. She had married the first respondent. The second respondent is the son of deceased and the first respondent.

¶44

3. Both the respondents named above and the petitioners have been staking claim to the terminal benefits/death benefits of deceased Noor Aaisha Sultana and the petitioners in the above writ petition have challenged the order dated 5.03.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Kadur in P & SC No.1/2015 based on the compromise between the respondents 1 and 2 before the Lok Adalat.

¶45

4. That at the intervention of this Hon'ble Court and at its humane advice to settle their dispute

¶46

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶47

amicably, both the parties, that is the petitioners 1 to 3 and the respondents 1 and 2 have agreed to share the terminal/death benefits of late Noor Aaisha Sultana amounting in all to Rs.11,48,945 (Eleven Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Five Only) in the following manner:

¶48

(1) The petitioners 1, 2 and 3 altogether shall receive a sum of Rs.4,00,000.00 (Rupees Four Lakhs Only) out of the total terminal benefits.

¶49

(2) The respondents 1 and 2 together shall receive the balance sum of Rs.7,48,945 (Rupees Seven Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Five Only)

¶50

5. That Petitioners on receipt of the above sums shall have no other claims of whatsoever nature against Respondents and agree to have settled all their disputes amicably.

¶51

6. That evidencing the above understanding and agreement petitioners 1, 2 and 3 and respondents 1 and 2 have subscribed their signatures to this joint memo."

¶52

The parties are present and are identified by their respective counsel. In token of their presence and acceptance of the terms of the joint memo, the parties and their respective

¶53

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:32145 WP No. 28611 of 2018

¶54

counsel have affixed their signatures to the order sheet of this Court.

¶55

In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed off in terms of the joint memo and petitioner Nos.1 to 3 are entitled to receive a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only) from the respondent Nos.3 to 7, while respondent Nos.1 and 2 are entitled to receive a sum of Rs.7,48,945/(Rupees Seven Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Five only) from the respondent Nos.3 to 7 from out of the terminal benefits of Smt. Noor Aaisha Sultana.

¶56

Sd/JUDGE

¶57

PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49

Sultan Mohiuddin v. Aslam Khan Umar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sultan Mohiuddin v. Aslam Khan Umar

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

S Girish Kumar Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization

M/S Precitech Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply

Sri Vijay Nayak M Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Manjula Vs the Janatha Seva Co-Operative Bank Private Limited

R T Sunil Kumar Vs Smt. Sudha

S. N. Karibasappa Vs the State of Karnataka