MT RAM KALI Vs. ADMINISTRATOR-GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application for the issue of letters of administration with the copy of a will annexed was made by Mt. Nanhi and Devi Prasad. The will was alleged to have been executed by B. Kunj Behari Lal, the father of Mt. Nanhi and the grand-father of Devi Prasad. There was an objection by B. Kunj Behari Lal's second wife and her daughter. The application was that letters of administration should be issued to the Administrator-General. The question arose whether a third party could make an application of that kind and ultimately the Administrator-General was substituted with the consent of the Court for the original applicants. The question now is whether letters of administration should be issued to the Administrator- General. Two issues were framed on the objections of the other party, namely, (i) Was the will of 6 December 1932, validly executed by Kunj Behari Lal? and (2) Is the Administrator. General legally entitled to obtain letters of administration as claimed by him on the facts alleged?

(2.) On issue 1 a witness, Muhammad Azhar, a son of Syed Jawad Husain, has been examined. He has proved that the "will was executed by Kunj Behari Lal in proper form and there is no reason to disbelieve his evidence. It is now not seriously contested that the will was validly executed. My finding on issue 1 is that the will of 6 December 1982 was validly executed by Kunj Behari Lal Issue 2 has given rise to considerable legal argument. It was argued by the objectors that letters of administration could be issued to the Administrator-General only under the provisions of Secs.9, 10 or 11, Administrator General's Act. At one time it seemed to me that this was a good argument because Section 8 upon which the applicants relied seemed merely to set forth an order of preference, that is, seemed to lay down only that the Administrator-General where he had a right to the issue of letters of administration was to be preferred to creditors or legatees other than universal legatees or friends of the deceased. On consideration, however, I have come to the conclusion that the Administrator-General is entitled to obtain letters of administration in this case. I have been mainly influenced by the provisions of Section 7 of the Act which says: Any letters of administration, which are granted after the commencement of this Act by the High Court shall be granted to the Administrator-General of the division unless they are granted to the next-of-kin of the deceased.

(3.) There can be only one meaning to the words of this section. Letters of administration issued by a High Court can be issued only to the next-of-kin of the deceased or to the Administrator-General. Secs.9, 10 and 11 of the Act refer only to persons who are not exempted within the meaning of definition of exempted persons or to persons who live within the local limits of the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the High Courts at Presidency Towns. The person who executed the will was an exempted person and his assets were not within the local limits to which I have referred. The provisions of Secs.9,10 or 11 of the Act do not apply to him. If the provisions of Section 7 of the Act were not read to mean that letters of administration could be issued to the Administrator-General of the division even in respect of the estate of an exempted person, then for such an estate no letters of administration could be issued except to the next-of kin and that would have been contrary to the provisions of Section 231, Succession Act. It is true that the provisions of the Succession Act cannot be read to affect the rights of an Administrator General, but I do not think that the Administrator-General's Act without specifically saying so would have contemplated a repeal of the provisions of the Succession Act applied to persons other than the Administrator- General of a division. I have come to the conclusion, therefore, that the Administrator-General may apply for letters of administration in respect of any estate and that S. 8, Administrator-General's Act, must be read so as to mean that he will have a right in preference to creditors or legatees other than universal legatees or friends of the deceased in any Court other than a High Court. In a High Court, of course, he has preference under Section 7 over every body except the next-of -kin. Learned Counsel also drew my attention to Secs.31, 32 and 37, Administrator-General's Act. These sections would not be conclusive in my judgment. Section 31 applies only to the grant of certificates to certain persons by the Administrator-General that they are entitled to the assets of small estates valued at less than Rs. 2000/ and Section 32 says only that the Administrator General, if he does not issue a certificate in respect of these estates, may administer them without taking out letters of administration provided that the estates are not those of exempted persons or not within certain local limits. Section 32 does not say that the Administrator-General may not administer small estates of exempted persons if he obtains letters of administration. I am satisfied that letters of administration may issue to the Administrator-General in this case.