Dismissed

Toparam Lavanya v. The Commissioner

Telangana HC9 Oct 2009CMA/1228/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal against the dismissal of a succession application. The court held that a succession certificate cannot be granted solely on grounds of missing status without a prior judicial declaration of death.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed. The appellant was granted liberty to resubmit the original petition or file a fresh petition in the proper form after obtaining a declaration of death.

Toparam Lavanya Vs The Commissioner — Succession and Inheritance | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY

¶2

and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR

¶3

C.M.A.No.1228 of 2008

¶4

Date: 09.10.2009

¶5

Between: Toparam Lavanya

¶6

…. Appellant And The Commissioner, Social Welfare, A.P., Hyderabad and others.

¶7

…. Respondents

¶8

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶9

JUDGMENT (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy)

¶10

The appellant filed the Succession O.P. in C.F.R.No.470 of 2008 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Armoor under Section 373(1)&(2) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 to grant succession certificate by declaring that she is the only legal heir of her father-in-law namely Toparam Malka, who is missing since 09.09.1999, for obtaining job on compassionate grounds. On return of the petition, by docket order, dated 10.09.2008, the present appeal is filed.

¶11

Admittedly, the appellant is seeking issuance of succession certificate on the ground that her father-in-law namely Toparam Malka was missing since 09.09.1999. According to the appellant, on the complaint filed by her, the police registered a case under the head “Man Missing” vide FIR No.27/2003 and filed charge sheet on 27.01.2005 stating that all efforts were made to trace the missing man, but in vain, and therefore, her father-in-law is deemed to have been dead and she is entitled to succession certificate. Unless a declaration is sought for by the appellant from the Competent Court that her fatherin-law died, she cannot claim succession certificate. Therefore, the Court below rightly held that issuance of succession certificate without seeking the declaration is not tenable in the eye of law.

¶12

In view of the above, return of the O.P by the Court below as not maintainable, does not suffer from manifest illegality warranting interference of this Court.

¶13

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is

¶14

at liberty to seek appropriate relief by resubmitting the O.P or by filing a fresh O.P in proper form. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

A. GOPAL REDDY, J __________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 09.10.2009 va

Toparam Lavanya v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Toparam Lavanya v. The Commissioner

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

M/s.Prithvi Information Solutions Ltd. Vs Sojitz Corporation

R.D.O.(L.a.O.) Warangal Vs Tahera Khatoon and 40 Others

K. Ramanjaneyulu Vs K. Pradeep Kumar

Masavarapu Yerrayyamma and 2 Ors. Vs Lekkala Hymavathi

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Karanam Subramanyam Aruna , Aruna

Masavarapu Yerrayyamma Vs Kekkala Hyma , Hymavathi