Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Smt. Annapurna, claiming to be the second wife of the deceased Kantesh Khandagale, filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 CPC to be impleaded as plaintiff No.3 in O.S. No.247/2022, which was originally a petition for succession certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, filed by respondent No.1 (Kavita, the first wife) and respondent No.2 (Pranav, the son). The trial court rejected the impleadment application. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC. The High Court considered whether the appellant is a necessary party. The court noted that the appellant claims to be the second wife and thus has a direct interest in the estate of the deceased. The court held that for effective and complete adjudication of the rights to the succession certificate, the appellant's presence is essential. The court set aside the trial court's order and allowed the impleadment, directing the trial court to permit the appellant to be added as a party and to proceed with the suit afresh. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order I Rule 10(2) - Impleadment of Necessary Party - Succession Certificate - The appellant, claiming to be the second wife of the deceased, sought impleadment in a suit for succession certificate filed by the first wife and son. The trial court rejected the application. The High Court held that the appellant is a necessary party as her presence is essential for effective and complete adjudication of the rights to the succession certificate. The court set aside the rejection and allowed the impleadment. (Paras 2-6)
B) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 372 - Succession Certificate - Right of Second Wife - The court observed that the appellant, claiming to be the second wife, has a direct interest in the estate of the deceased and her right to be heard cannot be denied. The succession certificate proceeding requires determination of who is entitled to the certificate, and the appellant's claim must be considered. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, claiming to be the second wife of the deceased, is a necessary and proper party to the proceedings for issuance of a succession certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and whether the trial court erred in rejecting her application for impleadment.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.11.2024 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi in O.S. No.247/2022 is set aside. The appellant is permitted to be impleaded as a party in the suit. The trial court is directed to permit the appellant to file her written statement and proceed with the suit afresh. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Order I Rule 10(2) CPC
- Section 372 Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- impleadment of necessary party
- succession certificate
- second wife's right to be heard
Case Details
2025 LawText (KAR) (01) 50
Regular First Appeal No. 100004 of 2025
Smt. Annapurna W/o Kantesh Khandagale
Kavita W/o Kantesh Khandagale, Pranav S/o Kantesh Khandagale, The General Manager Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Kasbekar Metgud Clinic Rep. by Dr. Basavaraj H. Metgud
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Regular First Appeal against rejection of impleadment application in a suit for succession certificate.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought to set aside the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2024 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi in O.S. No.247/2022, and to dismiss the suit of the plaintiffs, or in the alternative, to allow her impleadment.
Filing Reason
The appellant's application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC was rejected by the trial court.
Previous Decisions
The trial court rejected I.A. No.V filed by the appellant for impleading her as plaintiff No.3 in O.S. No.247/2022.
Issues
Whether the appellant is a necessary and proper party to the succession certificate proceedings.
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the impleadment application.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that she is the second wife of the deceased and has a direct interest in the estate, and her presence is necessary for complete adjudication.
The respondents opposed the impleadment, but the judgment does not detail their arguments.
Ratio Decidendi
A person claiming to be the second wife of the deceased is a necessary party to a proceeding for issuance of a succession certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, as her presence is essential for effective and complete adjudication of the rights to the certificate. Order I Rule 10(2) CPC empowers the court to add such a party at any stage of the proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
This appeal is filed by the appellant, who has filed I.A No.V under Order I Rule 10(2) R/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for impleading Smt.Annapurna W/o Kantesh Khandagale as plaintiff No.3 in O.S No.247/2022 (P & SC No.27/2021), which is rejected and against the decree passed in the suit for issuance of succession certificate as per Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the present appeal is filed.
The respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed petition in P & SC No.27/2021 for issuance of succession certificate in respect of the death of Kantesh Khandagale.
The appellant claims to be the second wife of the deceased Kantesh Khandagale.
Therefore, for effective and complete adjudication of the rights of the parties, the appellant is a necessary party.
Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Procedural History
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed P & SC No.27/2021 (later converted to O.S. No.247/2022) for issuance of succession certificate. The appellant filed I.A. No.V under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC for impleadment, which was rejected by the trial court on 25.11.2024. The appellant then filed the present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC. The High Court heard the appeal and delivered judgment on 22.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order I Rule 10(2), Section 151, Section 96, Order 41 Rule 1
- Indian Succession Act, 1925: Section 372
