Skip to content


Angappa Goundan Vs. Kuppammal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Reported in(1970)1MLJ170
AppellantAngappa Goundan
RespondentKuppammal
Cases ReferredBasappa v. Siddamma A.I.R.
Excerpt:
- .....amendment of section 214 making an exception in the case of a claim under section 8 of the hindu succession act (central act xxx of 1955). the matter is not bare of authority. it came up, squarely in the form that it now arises, except for the distinction that that was a case of an execution of a decree already obtained under section 214 (1) (b), before a learned single judge of the mysore high court in basappa v. siddamma a.i.r. 1966 mys. 198. the learned judge held that the party could not proceed without the production of a succession certificate, and that there was no conflict between section 214 of the indian succession act, and section 8 of the hindu succession act, since both could simultaneously apply or be in force.3. of course, if the legislative intent was that persons.....
Judgment:

M. Anantanarayanan, C.J.

1. The short point that arises in this revision proceeding is whether a Hindu widow, claiming to be the sole heir to the assets of her husband, who died intestate, under Section 8 of the Succession Act, 1956 (XXX of 1956), is bound to produce a succession certificate under Section 214 (1) (a) of the Succession Act, when she brings forward a suit in a Court for a decree against the debtor of the deceased husband.

2. It is not necessary to refer to the matter in any great detail, for the point seems to be obvious, whether Section 214 (1) (a) or Section 214 (1) (b) is the relevant provision of law, that perhaps, by oversight, there has been no legislative amendment of Section 214 making an exception in the case of a claim under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act (Central Act XXX of 1955). The matter is not bare of authority. It came up, squarely in the form that it now arises, except for the distinction that that was a case of an execution of a decree already obtained under Section 214 (1) (b), before a learned single Judge of the Mysore High Court in Basappa v. Siddamma A.I.R. 1966 Mys. 198. The learned Judge held that the party could not proceed without the production of a succession certificate, and that there was no conflict between Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act, and Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, since both could simultaneously apply or be in force.

3. Of course, if the legislative intent was that persons claiming under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, need not produce a succession certificate when seeking to recover a debt due in the deceased person, or to execute a decree already obtained by such person, then, either Section 214 should be suitably amended, or Section 8 should be invested with a overriding or superseding effect. When that has not been done, the party is bound to produce the succession certificate in respect of the asset claimed. This is also for the protection of the debtor, since learned Counsel for the debtor states that some one else may, conceivably, claim to be heir of the deceased creditor along with the widow. I, therefore, allow the revision, set aside the decree and remit the suit for further trial according to law. Time may be granted to the plaintiff (respondent) to obtain and produce the succession certificate before the suit is finally disposed of. No costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //