SURESH BATHRE Vs. AAM JANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order dated 5.5.2011, passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No.26/2010 by the District Judge Katni, affirming the order dated 13.2.2010 passed in Succession Case No.1/2006, by the First Civil Judge, Class-I, Katni.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this revision are that the respondent No.4 filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of a succession certificate in respect of the amount deposited by one late Ram Ratan. It was contended that said Ram Ratan was an employee of the railway and after his retirement, he was getting the pension which he was depositing in the Saving Bank Account No.9397 in the Punjab National Bank. The petitioner herein is the real brother of respondent No.4, but he was living separately at Tikuriya, District Katni, for the last 17-18 years. The respondent No.4 was looking after his father and being pleased with the services rendered by respondent No.4, his father late Ram Ratan has executed a registered will on 16.8.1999 in his favour bequeathing all his movable and part of immovable properties. Said Ram Ratan had died on 1.11.2005 after a prolong illness. When the respondent No.4 approached the bank for the purposes of getting the amount deposited in the Saving Bank Account of said Ram Ratan in the bank of respondent No.2, a succession certificate was demanded and for the said purposes, the application was required to be filed. The petitioner herein and the respondent No.5 were also made the party in the said application. The said person contested the application made by the respondent No.4 contending that the will said to be executed by Ram Ratan was nothing, but a forged document. All the retiral dues of said Ram Ratan were paid to the members of the family. There was no question of granting the succession certificate in respect of respondent No.4 only. In fact, the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 were also entitled to the grant of succession certificate for the purpose of payment of the amount deposited by said Ram Ratan.

(3.) The Succession Court recorded the evidence of the parties. The respondent No.4 submitted before the Succession Court that the original will deed was misplaced and since it was a registered document, a certified copy of the same was obtained and the same has been produced. Such a secondary evidence be taken on record. It was further contended that one of the attesting witnesses of the will was available and she is required to be examined. The Succession Court permitted the respondent No.4 to adduce the evidence in this respect and after recording the evidence, came to the conclusion that since the will has been proved in favour of the respondent No.4, therefore, he alone was entitled to grant of succession certificate. Accordingly, the application of respondent No.4 was allowed. Being aggrieved by such an order passed by the Succession Court, the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 both have jointly filed the appeal before the lower appellate Court under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The appeal was considered by the Court below and since the appeal has been dismissed, present revision has been filed.