(1.) IT is contended that in all cases a court dealing with an application for a succession certificate must hold some inquiry as to a claim by an applicant before it can hold that it raises questions too intricate and difficult for decision in a summary trial. In our opinion the language of Section 7 of the Act does not support this contention. The pleadings in the case may be quite sufficient to show that the inquiry would be too difficult or intricate. The court has, no doubt, to satisfy itself that the person to whom it grants the certificate has a prima facie right, and for this purpose some inquiry might be necessary in many cases, but whereas in this case the rival claimant is the widow of the person for whose assets the certificate is asked, the prima facie right is clear. Sivamma v. Subbumma (1894) I.L.R. 17 M. 477 is relied on for the appellants. That Judgment may be perfectly right on the particular facts of the case but if it intended to lay down a hard and fast rule that the inquiry into any question could not be held to be intricate (sic) difficult before it is conducted to some extent it must in our opinion be held to have gone too far.
(2.) WE dismiss the appeal with costs.