NIRANJAN PRASAD MOHANTY Vs. SUCHETA MOHANTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred under section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 by the plaintiff ­ appellant in R.C.C. Case No. 1 of 2009. The said case was filed for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of the Will executed by one late Chittaranjan Mohanty in favour of the plaintiff ­ appellant Niranjan Prasad Mohanty and defendant -respondent no. 4 ­ Nihar Ranjan Mohanty allegedly on 16.5.1976 in respect of the properties mentioned in the Schedule of property of the petition. By the judgment in the said R.C.C. Case No. 1 of 2009 dated 18.11.2011, the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Ist Court, Cuttack rejected the prayer of the plaintiff ­ appellant. Hence this appeal.

(2.) IN order to appreciate the contentions raised by the respective parties, it would be apt and proper to delineate the facts leading to the impugned judgment preferably in a tabular manner date -wise.

(3.) AS stated earlier, the said Will was put to Probate for issuance of Letters of Administration in Misc. Case No. 10 of 1977 -79, which was granted ex parte and subsequently on the application filed by the respondent no.1, the same was revoked and thereafter, the said Misc. Case, numbered as O.S. No. 6 of 1987, was dismissed for non - prosecution. The appellant further pleaded that after his retirement expecting that Sucheta ­ respondent no. 1 would behave properly and would maintain the same relationship as her deceased husband and finding that such expectation has failed as she has filed T.S. No. 194 of 1990 for partition, he (appellant) filed a fresh application, being R.C.C. No.1 of 2009, for grant of Letters of Administration on the self - same Will, which was under consideration earlier in Misc. Case No. 10 of 1977 -79. The respondents 1 to 3, who were defendants 1 to 3 in R.C.C. Case No. 1 of 2009 on appearing in the said case, filed their written statement, inter alia, pleading that the present application is not maintainable and the same is not in proper form and substance and is not supported by an affidavit, which is statutorily required. The schedule of property, as per the requirement, has also not been given which makes the application incomplete for which it is liable to be rejected. They further claimed that the name of two daughters of late Chittaranjan have been wrongly mentioned which indicates the oblique motive of the appellant -plaintiff. Amongst other grounds, they also pleaded that even though they are separate in mess, but there has been no partition by metes and bounds of the joint family house at Cuttack and the suit house is the only residential house of the parties. The residential house/building in the name of Chittaranjan at Purusottampur is in forcible possession of persons set up by the appellant ­ plaintiff and respondent - defendant no.4, for which they being ladies, are being compelled to suffer at the instance of the appellant ­ plaintiff and the respondent ­ defendant no.4. They have no other residential house except the suit house. They also denied the other allegations made in the plaint. According to them, the marital life of late Chittaranjan and the respondent no.1 lasted for very short span, i.e., less than three years during which period, she conceived twice and gave birth to two daughters. Therefore, it is highly improbable that within the short span of three years, she could manage to take over the management of the business of her husband and also managed the agricultural lands. It was, rather, claimed that they did not get any help or assistance from the brothers of late Chittaranjan, i.e., the appellant and the respondent no. 4, when Chittaranjan was critically ill and the respondent no. 1, the widow, alone looked after her ailing husband as well as two minor children, who were by that time only one year eleven months and ten months old respectively. In this background, it was pleaded by them that it was preposterous to suggest that during the life time of Chittaranjan, the defendant - respondent no. 1 took over the management of the business and agricultural lands.