9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1449 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking impleadment in the place of deceased - whether Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust or Mr. MAMR Muthiah, the adopted son of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar is required to be impleaded in TCP/1/2016 in the place of the Petitioner viz. Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar? - HELD THAT - It is not in doubt that Dr. MAM Ramaswamy during his lifetime, made a Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 09.02.2015 which is registered as Doc. No. 51/2015 in the office of the SRO Mylapore constituting a Trust under the name and style of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust and the recitals made in the said Trust deed - Further, it is also seen that the Petitioner viz. Dr. NAM Ramaswamy has also executed his last Will and Testament dated 18.02.2015 as Doc. No. 16/2015 in the office of the SRO Mylapore. It is also seen that on 06.04.2015, in the 1st meeting of the Board of Trustees of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust which was held in the presence of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy, the Trust has accepted all the movable assets of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy to the Trust. Oral gift was part of birthday gift on 30.09.2015, which was accepted by the Trust as recorded in the minutes dated 06.11.2015. The contention raised by the Respondent/Applicant in CA/69/2016 that the probate of the Will dated 18.02.2015 executed by Dr. MAM Ramaswamy is pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in OP No. 894/2016 and hence it cannot be relied up for any purpose, does not hold much water since the recitals made in the Will is clear and explicit and that the Trust is not claiming any right as an executor or legatee under the Will dated 18.02.2015, however the Trust is only seeking to rely upon the Will dated 18.02.2015 for collateral purpose - a perusal of the Will dated 18.02.2015 would clearly posit the fact that the relationship between Dr. MAM Ramaswamy and Mr. MAMR Muthiah was so strained that he did not even allow his adopted son Mr. MAMR Muthiah to perform obsequies or rituals in relation to his death. Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust is entitled to step into the shoes of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy in so far as adjudication of TCP/1/2016 is concerned - Application allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Substitution of legal representative in place of the deceased petitioner. 2. Validity and recognition of trust deeds and will. 3. Entitlement to the deposit and movable properties. 4. Pending probate and legal heirship certificate challenges. Issue 1: Substitution of Legal Representative The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust or Mr. MAMR Muthiah, the adopted son, should be impleaded in place of the deceased Dr. MAM Ramaswamy in TCP/1/2016. The Tribunal noted that Dr. MAM Ramaswamy had executed a Deed of Declaration of Trust on 09.02.2015, creating the Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust. The Trust Deed explicitly stated that all movable and immovable properties would vest in the Trust upon his death. Furthermore, the Will dated 18.02.2015 reiterated that no properties would be left to MAMR Muthiah, and all would go to the Trust. Given the strained relationship between Dr. MAM Ramaswamy and MAMR Muthiah, and the clear terms of the Will and Trust Deed, the Tribunal concluded that the Charitable Trust was entitled to step into the shoes of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy for the adjudication of TCP/1/2016. Consequently, TCA/1/2016 was allowed, and CA/69/2016 was dismissed. Issue 2: Validity and Recognition of Trust Deeds and Will The Tribunal examined the Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 09.02.2015 and the Will dated 18.02.2015. The Trust Deed constituted the Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust, and the Will bequeathed all properties to this Trust. Despite the pending probate of the Will in the High Court of Madras, the Tribunal held that the Trust was not claiming rights as an executor or legatee but was relying on the Will for collateral purposes. The Tribunal found the recitals in the Will clear and explicit, supporting the Trust's claim. Issue 3: Entitlement to the Deposit and Movable Properties The Tribunal noted that Dr. MAM Ramaswamy had made an oral gift of all his movable assets to the Trust on 30.09.2015, which was accepted by the Trust. This included the fixed deposits and loans and advances listed in the Will. The Respondent Company argued that the amount was a long-term interest-free loan due in March 2023. However, the Tribunal concluded that the properties gifted by Dr. MAM Ramaswamy to the Trust became the properties of the Charitable Trust upon his death, as per the Trust Deed and Will. Issue 4: Pending Probate and Legal Heirship Certificate Challenges The Tribunal acknowledged the pending probate of the Will in OP No. 894/2016 and the challenge to the legal heirship certificate obtained by MAMR Muthiah. However, it found that these issues did not preclude the substitution of the Charitable Trust in place of Dr. MAM Ramaswamy for the current proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized the clear terms of the Will and Trust Deed, which excluded MAMR Muthiah from inheriting any properties. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed TCA/1/2016, substituting Dr. MAM Ramaswamy Chettiar of Chettinad Charitable Trust in place of the deceased petitioner, and dismissed CA/69/2016 filed by MAMR Muthiah. The Charitable Trust was directed to file an amended copy of the petition within two weeks. The case was posted for hearing on 06.07.2022.
|
