Case Note & Summary
The present Civil Revision Application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 384(1)(3) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was filed by the revisionists (heirs of deceased Pratapsinh Harwarilal Dalal) against the judgment and order dated 31.8.2020 passed by the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Junagadh in Regular Civil Appeal No.3 of 2017. The appellate court had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and order of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Junagadh in CMA No.429 of 2016, whereby succession certificate was granted in favour of the original petitioners (respondents herein). The original petitioners were Ranjanben Pratapsinh Dalal (claiming to be the legally wedded wife) and her two children Grishma and Prajjval. The revisionists, including Satvantiben Pratapsinh Dalal, claimed that revisionist No.1 was the legally wedded wife of the deceased and that the original petitioners had obtained the succession certificate by playing fraud upon the court and without joining them as parties. The deceased Pratapsinh Harwarilal Dalal was a Veterinary Doctor and Assistant Professor at the Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Agricultural University, Junagadh. He married Ranjanben on 14.8.1993, and out of the wedlock, two children were born. The revisionists contended that the marriage of the deceased with Ranjanben was not valid as the deceased was already married to revisionist No.1. The trial court, after considering the evidence, granted the succession certificate. The appellate court affirmed the same. The High Court, in revision, examined the scope of Section 115 CPC and held that the revisional jurisdiction is limited to jurisdictional errors and cannot be used to reappreciate evidence. The court noted that the proceedings for succession certificate are summary in nature and do not finally decide the rights of parties. The court further held that the burden of proof lies on the objector to establish that the claimant is not the legally wedded wife, and the revisionists failed to discharge that burden. The allegations of fraud were vague and not proved. Consequently, the revision was dismissed, and the succession certificate granted in favour of the original petitioners was upheld.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code - Revision - Section 115 CPC - Scope of Interference - The revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC is limited to jurisdictional errors and cannot be exercised to correct erroneous findings of fact or law unless the subordinate court has acted without jurisdiction, exceeded its jurisdiction, or failed to exercise jurisdiction. The High Court cannot reappreciate evidence or substitute its own findings. (Paras 5-10) B) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Succession Certificate - Section 384 - Summary Proceeding - A proceeding for grant of succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 is summary in nature. The court is not required to conduct a full-fledged trial on the validity of marriage or title. The grant of certificate does not decide the rights of parties finally and is subject to adjudication in a civil suit. (Paras 11-15) C) Evidence - Burden of Proof - Marriage - In a succession certificate proceeding, the burden lies on the objector who alleges that the claimant is not the legally wedded wife to prove the same. Mere denial or suspicion is not sufficient. The court may rely on documentary evidence such as marriage certificate, voter ID, etc. (Paras 16-20) D) Fraud - Pleading and Proof - Allegation of fraud must be specifically pleaded and proved by cogent evidence. Vague allegations of fraud without particulars cannot be entertained. In the present case, the revisionists failed to plead or prove any fraud in obtaining the succession certificate. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court in a civil revision under Section 115 CPC can interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below granting succession certificate in favour of the original petitioners, and whether the revisionists have made out a case of fraud or lack of jurisdiction.
Final Decision
The Civil Revision Application is dismissed. The judgment and order dated 31.8.2020 passed by the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Junagadh in Regular Civil Appeal No.3 of 2017 confirming the grant of succession certificate in favour of the original petitioners is upheld.
Law Points
- Succession certificate proceedings are summary in nature
- Section 115 CPC limited to jurisdictional error
- Concurrent findings of fact not to be interfered unless perverse
- Burden of proof on objector to establish marriage
- Fraud must be specifically pleaded and proved
