DAMODAR MAHASUAR Vs. RAGHUNATH MAHASUAR AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application arises out of the order dated 15.11.2000 passed in Misc. Case No. 133 of 1994 by which the District Delegate. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri has rejected the application filed by the present petitioner with a prayer to consider the question of maintainability of the misc. case as a preliminary issue since O.P. No. 1 -Raghunath Mahasuar has no locus standi to file the said misc. case, which is an application under Sec. 263 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter called 'the Act') praying for revocation of the letters of administration granted in favour of the present petitioner -Damodar Mahasuar under Sec. 278 of the Act in respect of the property of the deceased Biswanath Khuntia, in Misc. Case No. 47/11 of 1993.

(2.) At the threshold it is worthwhile to mention that the application under Sec. 278 of the Act was initially filed before the District Judge, Puri. who transferred the said petition to the Court of the District Delegate, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri. being a non -contentious matter basing upon a declaration made in column 3 of the application to the effect "the deceased testator has left no relative of his own."

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the present revision application are that Damodar Mahasuar, the present petitioner, filed an application under Sec. 278 of the Act, registered as Misc. Case No. 47/11 of 1993 and on the same being allowed, letters of administration was granted in favour of Damodar. Thereafter the present opposite party No. 1 -Raghunath Mahasuar filed an application under Sec. 263 of the Act, registered as Misc. Case No. 133 of 1994, for revocation of the aforesaid letters of administration so granted by the District Delegate by order dated 28.1.1994 in respect of the property of late Biswanath Khuntia, alleging that the Will, on the basis of which the grant had been made in favour of Damodar, was a forged and manufactured document. It was further alleged therein that the testator -Biswanath Khuntia died at the age of 35 years by committing suicide on 5.3.1988; inquest was held and autopsy over the dead body was conducted on the same day and a case was registered as U.D.G.R. No. 38 of 1988, which ended in submission of final report by the Police, and the death was not due to any illness, as contended by Darrjodar. It was further sated that, Artatrana, Dinabandhu, brothers of Damodar. and Raghunath, and -Dasarathi, Radhamohan and Laxminarayan being the mother's brothers of the deceased are his Class -II heirs, but Damodar with an oblique motive, falsely stated in his application under Sec. 278 that the deceased "testator has left no relative of his own" Basing upon the aforesaid allegations, revocation of the letters of administration was sought for by Raghunath. In the aforesaid application for revocation of the letters administration i.e. Misc. Case No. 133 of 1994, the present petitioner -Damodar filed an application praying to treat the question of locus standi and maintainability of the application for revocation as a preliminary issue and decide the same first before proceeding with the application under Sec. 263 of the Act. The District Delegate after hearing both the parties rejected the application filed by Damodar and proceeded for hearing of the misc. case. The rejection of the aforesaid application is challenged in the present revision application.