MALATI ROY CHOWDHURY Vs. SUDHINDRANATH MAJUMDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal the appellant Malati has assailed the judgment and order of the learned trial Judge whereby and whereunder appellant's application for grant of letters of administration as well as that of one Basanti Bagchi since deceased, under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 have been dismissed. During pendency of the application of Basanti she died and in her place and stead one Jayanti Sanyal was substituted. The said Jayanti Sanyal's heirs and legal representatives, did not prefer any appeal against this judgment. As such, the question in this appeal is as to whether the learned trial Judge has dismissed the application of the appellant rightly or wrongly.

(2.) The case before he learned trial Judge made out by the appellant in her separate application was that she was an adopted daughter of one Tripti Roy Chowdhury, since deceased. On the death of Tripti. as her adopted daughter, Malati had become the sole heiress and legal representative of all her estate and effects. The said Basanti was the sister of Tripti Roy Chowdhury's husband, Bimalakanta Roy Chowdhury who predeceased her. The said Roy Chowdhury couple was issueless and at the time of death of Tripti there has been no heir and heiress under sub-section 1 (a) of Section 15 read with Section 16 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The contesting defendants viz. Sudhirindranath Majumdar and others who appeared before the Learned Court below were claiming to be the heirs and legal representatives under Clause (b) of Section 15(1) of the said Act.

(3.) The learned trial Judge after having appreciated and considered the oral and documentary evidence held that as far as the appellant is concerned she is not the adopted daughter of Tripti. The substituted plaintiff Jayanti Sanyal was held not to have any locus standi to make that application.