PRABHA BHASIN Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18th November, 1988 of Shri S.K. landon. Administrative Sub -Judge, Delhi whereby he had directed that the brothers and sisters of the deceased be also impleaded as respondents in the petition as they are necessary parties.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that Smt. Prabha Bhasin, wife of the deceased had filed an application for grant of Succession Certificate under Sec. 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of the movable property left by her husband, Shri Krishan Kumar Bhasin. In the said application it was submitted that apart from the petitioner, the deceased had also left one married daughter namely Smt. Poonam Bawa as an heir and that deceased had died intestate. in course of time said Smt. Poonam Bawa is said to have filed an affidavit bringing out that she had no objection to the grant of Succession Certificate with regard to moveable property of her deceased father to the petitioner, Smt. Prabha Bhasin. The statement of said Prabha Bhasin was recorded as Public Witness -1. Thereafter, a supplementary statement of the said Prabha Bhasin was recorded in which it came on record that the deceased had also left behind three brothers arid two sisters. It was thereupon that the learned Administrative -Sub -Judge directed that they are necessary parties and that they should be impleaded in the petition.

(3.) It has been argued that in view of the provisions of Sec. 8 read with Schedule of Hindu Succession Act the brothers and sisters were not necessary parties to the application. I find weight in the submission to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sec. 8 of the Hindu Succession Act lays down as under: - SECTION -8: