The High Court dismissed Civil Revision Petitions challenging orders directing the disbursal of share amounts from a bank deposit held by the Post Master, pursuant to a Succession Certificate. The Court held that avoiding multiplicity of proceedings justified the lower courts in entertaining the application despite the certificate being issued.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022 and C.M.P. Nos. 19639 and 19640 of 2022
In C.R.P. No. 3715 of 2022:-
R.Mani ... Petitioner / Appellant / Respondent
Vs.
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2021 passed in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
In C.R.P. No. 3716 of 2022:-
R.Mani ... Petitioner / 1st Respondent Vs. 1. R.Duraisamy ... 1st Respondent/ Appellant
1/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
Grade - II, Rasipuram Town, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District ... 2nd Respondent / 2nd Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 25.01.2021 passed in Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
For Petitioner : M/s. R.Shase (In both CRPs) For R1 : M/s. D.Chitra Maragatham (In both CRPs) For R2 : Mr. C.Samivel (In both CRPs)
C O M M O N O R D E R
These Civil Revision Petitions have been preferred as against the order
dated 25.01.2021 passed in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 and the Cross Objection dated 25.01.2021 in C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Namakkal, wherein, the petitioner and the 1st respondent herein have filed an appeal and Cross Objection against the order dated 26.11.2019 passed by the Sub Court, Rasipuram respectively in I.A. No. 1 of
2/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
2016 in S.O.P. No. 1 of 2013. The said appeal in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 was dismissed and the said Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 was allowed. Against which, these present Civil Revisions Petitions are filed.
as follows :-
The petitioner and the 1st respondent jointly filed petition in S.O.P. No. 1 of 2013 before the Trial Court for issuance of Succession Certificate and the same was allowed and the Succession Certificate was issued on 14.07.2014 stating that both the petitioners in the said S.O.P. are entitled to equal share. Thereafter, due to misunderstanding between the parties, the 1st respondent herein approached the 2nd respondent for getting his share and the same was refused. Thereafter, the 1st respondent herein filed an application in I.A. No. 1 of 2016 in S.C.O.P. No. 1 of 2013 before the Sub Court, Rasipuram to direct the 2nd respondent herein to pay a half share of the amount deposited into the 2nd respondent and the same was allowed. Challenging the said order, the petitioner herein has filed an appeal in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 before the Principal District Judge, Namakkal against which, the 1st respondent herein filed Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 for further amount of half share in Rs. 2,50,000/- which was omitted in I.A. No. 1 of
3/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
4/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
record.
5/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
respondent are brothers and they jointly filed the petition in S.O.P. No. 1 of 2013 before the Sub Court, Rasipuram for issuance of Succession Certificate and the same was allowed. As per the said order, both the petitioner and the 1st respondent are equally entitled to share over the deposits made before the 2nd respondent. Thereafter, due to misunderstanding between the parties, the petitioner did not cooperate with the 1st respondent in getting the deposit amount. Therefore, the 1st respondent filed an application in I.A. No. 1 of 2016 in S.O.P. No. 1 of 2013 to disburse the amount from the 2nd respondent prior to that when the 1st respondent approached the 2nd respondent, he refused to disburse the amount of his share as per the Succession Certificate. Thereby, the 1st respondent has filed the said I.A. before the Trial Court. The Trial Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the application and directed the 2nd respondent to disburse the share of the 1st respondent. The said order was challenged by the petitioner herein through appeal in C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020. In the said C.M.A. , the 1st respondent has been preferred Cross Objection in C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 stating that one of the item has to be mentioned which was omitted in the said I.A. The 1st Appellate Court dismissed the C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 filed by the petitioner and allowed the Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 filed by the 1st respondent.
6/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
S.O.P. No. 1 of 2013, the I.A. cannot be entertained. It is an admitted fact that both are equally entitled to share over the properties. After getting Succession Certificate, there was a dispute between the parties with regard to immovable properties and the petitioner did not cooperate for the 1st respondent. Therefore, the 1st respondent herein has filed application in respect of his share alone. There is no bar in filing the application to get his share separately, since already Succession Certificate was issued. Though, there is dispute in respect of the immovable properties, those issues can be decided through separate suit. Since already the Succession Certificate was issued, in order to meet the ends of justice and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the Trial Court as well as the 1st Appellate Court, entertained the application and correctly ordered to disburse the amount of the share of the 1st respondent.
the amount in respect of Rs. 2,50,000/- which was included in the main Succession Petition but the same was omitted to be included in I.A. No. 1 of 2016. Therefore, the 1st Appellate Court correctly allowed the Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020. Since there is no dispute in respect of the
quantum of share between the parties, the Trial Court has correctly allowed
7/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
the petition and directed the 2nd respondent to disburse the amount. The 1st Appellate Court also, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, correctly dismissed the C.M.A. No. 11 of 2020 filed by the petitioner and allowed the Cross Objection C.M.A. No. 16 of 2020 filed by the 1st respondent. Therefore, the orders passed by the Trial Court and the judgments passed by the 1st Appellate Court are proper and they do not warrant interference.
02.08.2024
Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No pal To
The Principal District Judge, Namakkal.
8/9
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
P.DHANABAL, J.,
pal
C.R.P. Nos. 3715 and 3716 of 2022
02.08.2024
9/9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Succession Certificate and the probate proceedings can be used for the disbursal of share amounts without maintaining a separate civil suit?
Whether the Trial Court and First Appellate Court correctly entertained the application and cross objection for disbursal of deposits after issuing Succession Certificate?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Mani
R. Duraisamy
The Post Master, Grade - II, Rasipuram
P. Dhanabal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
