Allowed

R.Thirumal Chakravarthy v. S.Rajasekar and Another

Madras HC16 Aug 2024OP/326/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grandson sought letters of administration with Will annexed for his deceased grandfather's Chennai properties. The Will was proved through an attesting witness as required under Section 69 Evidence Act. The petition was allowed with directions to execute a bond and render annual accounts.

What did the court decide?

Letters of administration with Will annexed granted; petitioner to administer scheduled properties, execute Rs.25,000 bond and render annual accounts.

R.Thirumal Chakravarthy Vs S.Rajasekar and Another — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶2

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶3

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

¶4

This Petition has been filed under Section 232 & 276 of the Indian Succession Act, r/w. Order XXV, Rule 5 of the Original side Rules for grant of letters of administration with the Will annexed to the Petitioner as grandson and beneficiary under the Will of the said deceased having effect throughout the State of Tamil Nadu.

¶5

2.The Petition proceeds on basis that Petitioner's grandfather late G.Sambandam owned immovable properties morefully described in the schedule mentioned in the Petition situated at No.33/12, Karnam Street, Velachery, Chennai 600 042. The late G.Sambandam was married to Devamirthem and out of the wedlock they begot three sons viz., S.Rajasekar, S.Rajakumar and S.Premkumar. The last son viz., S.Premkumar died on 17.07.2014. The immovable property belonging to late Devamirthem and situated at No.5 and No.1 Rajambal Street, was settled in favour of the first two sons viz., S.Rajasekar and S.Rajakumar. The Petitioner & the deceased late G.Sambandam resided and the later died on 21.01.2020 at the aforesaid address at No.33/12, Karnam Street, Velachery, Chennai 600042 which is well within the jurisdiction of this Court.

¶6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶7

1/5

¶8

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶9

3.The second son & 2^nd Respondent viz., S.Rajakumar who looked after and maintained his father G.Sambandam till his demise. Even before his death on 21.01.2020, the said G.Sambandam executed a Will in favour of the Petitioner, who is none other than his grandson born through S.Rajakumar.

¶10

4.The last Will marked as letter A and testament of Petitioner's grandfather late Gopalasamy Sambandam which was duly executed by him at the schedule premises on 06.11.2015 in the presence of the witnesses viz., S.Devamirthem, wife of Late G.Sambantham and R.Venkatesan son of Ramakrishnan residing as a tenant in the first floor of the schedule premises, whose name appear at the foot thereof. No Executor or Executors have been named in the said Will.

¶11

5.Even though Respondents were served and their names are printed in the causelist, no one represented on behalf of them.

¶12

6.After following due procedure, the Petitioner was invited to tender

¶13

evidence. The Petitioner was examined as PW1 and one of the attestors was

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

2/5

¶16

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶17

examined as PW2 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P.10 were marked, which are as follows:

¶18

*S.No*	*Particulars*	*Exhibits*
1	Copyof death certificate of S.Premkumar	P1
2	Original Will dated 06.11.2015 executed by G.Sambandan	P2
3	Copyof death certificate of S.Devamirthem	P3
4	Copyof death certificate of GopalsamySambandam	P4
5	Legal heirshipcertificate of Sambandam	P5
6	Form of valuation of Estate under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu Court fees & Suits Valuation Act, 1955	P6
7	Paperpublication in Tamil	P7
8	Paperpublication in English	P8
9	Copyof Sale deed dated 16.05.1958	P9
10	Affidavit of Attestingwitness Venkatesan	P10

¶19

7.Taking into consideration that the Will has been proved in the

¶20

manner known to law by examining the attesting witness PW2, which is one of the requisite conditions under Section 69 of the Indian Evidence Act and in view of the above oral and documentary evidences, I am of the considered view that there is no impediment to grant the relief sought in the Original Petition namely, granting Letters of Administration with Will annexed.

¶21

8.With the above observations, this Original Petition stands allowed. The Petitioner is directed to duly administer the properties and credits of the

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

3/5

¶24

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶25

deceased more fully described in the schedule. The Petitioner is directed to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) in favour of the Assistant Registrar (O.S.II) High Court, Madras. The Petitioner is further directed to render true and correct accounts once in a year.

¶26

16.08.2024

¶27

sai

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

4/5

¶30

O.P.No.326 of 2023

¶31

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

sai

O.P.No.326 of 2023

Dated: 16.08.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

5/5

R.Thirumal Chakravarthy v. S.Rajasekar and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Thirumal Chakravarthy v. S.Rajasekar and Another

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

Tajy Prasad Vs B.Sitakumari and 3 Others

Sarala Vs No Respondent

K.Shanmugam Vs P.Dhandapani

Sathish Krishnamurthy and another Vs No Respondent

J.K.Mahapatra Vs M/s R.Stahl Private Limited and 4 others

L.R.Parthasarathy Vs Padmavathy Ramasubramanian and 21 Others