THOMA CHACKO Vs. KOSHI VARGHESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 8 of 1119 of the District Court of Kottayam is the appellant before us. The suit was for a declaration of title and an injunction restraining the defendant from entering the plaint property. The suit was decreed by the Trial Court but was dismissed in appeal and the plaintiff was directed to pay the costs of the defendant. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff was appointed receiver of the plaint property and functioned as such.

(2.) The defendant filed an execution application for costs and certain amounts stated to be due from the plaintiff in respect of the period of his receivership, and died thereafter. Two of his heirs put in a petition for being impleaded as additional defendants, 2 and 3, and prayed for permission to continue the execution. The plaintiff objected on various grounds to the impleading and the continuance of the execution and his objections were negatived by the Court below. The learned District Judge in the order under appeal said:-

(3.) The only contention urged before us by the learned counsel for the appellant was that the lower court was wrong in not holding that a succession certificate was essential in view of S.214 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, before the respondents could seek any relief before the court. The relevant portion of S.214 reads:-