Case Note & Summary
The appellant, T. Nagendra Setty, filed an appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, challenging the order dated 30.08.2023 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete in P & SC No. 03/2022. The respondent No.1, T. Vishwanath Setty, had filed a petition for grant of succession certificate in respect of the estate of late T. Thippanna Setty. The appellant, who is the son of the deceased and a legal heir, was not impleaded as a party and no notice was issued to him. The trial court granted the succession certificate ex parte. The appellant contended that the order was passed without notice to him, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the appellant is a legal heir and ought to have been given notice. The court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the trial court for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the appellant and affording him an opportunity of hearing. The appeal was allowed.
Headnote
A) Succession Law - Succession Certificate - Notice to Heirs - Section 384 Indian Succession Act, 1925 - The court held that before granting a succession certificate, notice must be issued to all legal heirs. Failure to do so vitiates the order as it violates principles of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the appellant. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order granting succession certificate without issuing notice to the appellant, who is a legal heir, is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 30.08.2023 in P & SC No. 03/2022 set aside. Matter remitted to trial court for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the appellant and affording him opportunity of hearing.
Law Points
- Succession certificate
- Notice to all heirs
- Natural justice
- Section 384 Indian Succession Act
- 1925
- Setting aside ex parte order
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (02) 58
MFA No. 104732 of 2023 (ISA)
Sri M.S. Sathish for appellant, Smt. Pallavi S. Pachhapure for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Sri Shivasai M. Patil for respondent No.5, Sri Rakesh Bilki for respondent No.3
T. Vishwanath Setty, T. Manjunatha Setty, The Manager, Canara Bank, The Manager, Karnataka Grameena Bank, The Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 against order granting succession certificate.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the order dated 30.08.2023 in P & SC No. 03/2022 and dismiss the petition filed by respondent No.1.
Filing Reason
Appellant, a legal heir, was not impleaded or given notice before grant of succession certificate.
Previous Decisions
Trial court granted succession certificate ex parte on 30.08.2023.
Issues
Whether the order granting succession certificate without notice to the appellant, a legal heir, is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that he is a legal heir and was not impleaded or given notice, violating natural justice.
Respondents did not oppose the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
Before granting a succession certificate, notice must be issued to all legal heirs. Failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and renders the order unsustainable.
Judgment Excerpts
The appellant is the son of late T. Thippanna Setty and is a legal heir. He was not impleaded as a party nor was any notice issued to him.
The order impugned is set aside and the matter is remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the appellant.
Procedural History
Respondent No.1 filed P & SC No. 03/2022 for succession certificate. Trial court granted certificate ex parte on 30.08.2023. Appellant filed MFA No. 104732/2023 under Section 384 of Indian Succession Act, 1925.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Succession Act, 1925: 384
