2022 (6) TMI 1337 - HC - Indian Laws

Validity of succession certificate - it is contended that the petitioner has made a false representation and has obtained a Succession Certificate by concealing the material facts before the Trial court - HELD THAT - Having regard to the said material on record, it would be difficult to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been erroneously described as the sister of late Chandrashekar. Further, the petitioner has sought to contend that the petitioner was adopted by late Chandrashekar and his wife Damayanthi in the year 1970. In the cause title of the writ petition, the petitioner's age is described as 51 years. If that is so, the petitioner might have been born somewhere in the year 1971. Therefore, it would be highly difficult to believe that the petitioner was taken in adoption by Chandrashekar and his wife in the year 1970. Prima facie it appears that the petitioner has misrepresented before the trial court and by concealing the material facts she has obtained a certificate under Section 372 of the Act and the trial court having appreciated this aspect of the matter in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 151 of CPC has rightly directed the petitioner to re-deposit the amount of Rs.17,69,332/-, which is withdrawn by her from the Pragathi Krishna Grameena Bank on the strength of the certificate issued to her in P SC No.1/2016 - the order of the trial court does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity, which calls for interference by this court. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order dated 13th December 2021 passed by Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Sedam on I.A.No.6 filed under Section 151 of CPC in Misc.No.1/2020.

Analysis:
1. Background and Petitioner's Claim:
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, claiming to be the sister and sole legal heir of the deceased, who had deposited a substantial amount in a bank. The petitioner obtained a succession certificate in her favor after due legal proceedings.

2. Respondents' Allegations and Legal Proceedings:
The respondents, claiming to be the deceased's nieces and nephews, challenged the petitioner's succession certificate, alleging misrepresentation and concealment of facts. They filed an application under Section 383 of the Act, seeking the petitioner to deposit the withdrawn amount based on the certificate.

3. Court's Evaluation of Arguments:
The petitioner argued a mistake in her description as the deceased's sister, claiming to be the sister of the deceased's wife and adopted by the couple. However, the respondents contended that the petitioner consistently misrepresented herself as the deceased's sister in various legal proceedings.

4. Court's Decision and Reasoning:
The court analyzed the evidence and found it difficult to accept the petitioner's claims of being adopted by the deceased and his wife. It concluded that the petitioner had misrepresented facts to obtain the succession certificate and directed her to redeposit the withdrawn amount. The court upheld the trial court's decision, deeming it justified and declined to entertain the writ petition.

5. Final Order:
The writ petition was dismissed, instructing the trial court to proceed with the Section 383 petition on its merits without influence from the observations made in the current judgment. The court emphasized the importance of truthfulness and accurate representation in legal proceedings to maintain integrity and fairness.