Telangana High Court
Jaligama Jagannatha Rao vs The Lao on 26 April, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1397 of 2024
ORDER:
1. This Civil Revision petition is filed challenging the propriety and legality of the docket order dated 02.11.2023, in C.F.No.1948 of 2022 in E.P.No.1 of 2021 in L.A.O.P.No.5 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at Peddapalli whereunder the petition filed by Petitioner/L.R. of decree holder No. 1 under rules 230, 231, 233 to 235 of Civil Rules of Practice seeking issuance of a cheque for Rs.34,37,354 /- was rejected.
2. As can be seen from the affidavit in support of the petition, the case of the petitioner is that he is the legal representative of the decree holder No. 1 and claimant No.110 in the O.P. The land acquisition officer acquired their lands in Brahmanpally Village. On reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, the court by judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014 enhanced the compensation for the acquired lands. The judgment debtor did not file any appeal against the judgment and decree. But the claimants filed appeal vide L.A.A.S.No.193 of 2015 against the Judgment and Decree in the High Court and the appeal is now pending. After the filing of the appeal, his father(claimant 2 SN,J CRP_1397_2024 No.110) died testate on 02.09.2021. The petitioner filed I.A.No.1 of 2022 in the appeal to bring him on record as the legal representative of his deceased father on the strength of the Will Deed dated 11.02.2020 executed by his late father in his favour. By order dated 17.09.2022 the Hon'ble High Court allowed the petition and he is brought on record as legal representative of his father. His father and others had filed E.P. No.52 of 2016 for realization of the decretal amount. In that E.P. the judgment debtor deposited Rs.3 lakhs and E.P. was closed. Again his father and others filed E.P. No. 1 of 2021 for realization of the balance decretal amount and the judgment debtor deposited Rs.53,01,136/- on 26.09.2022. Thus the total amount deposited by the judgment debtor is Rs 56,01,136/-. The petitioner as legal representative of his deceased father is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.34,37,354/-. Hence the petitioner is entitled for issuance of cheque for that amount in his favour, is the specific plea of the petitioner herein.
3. The office of the court took the objection that family members certificate, will deed and succession certificate were not filed along with the petition and accordingly returned the petition.
3 SN,J CRP_1397_2024
4. The counsel for the petitioner resubmitted the petition without complying with the objection raised and so the matter was called on bench.
5. The executing court after hearing the counsel for the petitioner on the office objection by the impugned docket order rejected the petition.
6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of rejection, the petitioner preferred the present revision petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Perused the record.
8. As can be seen from the impugned order dated 02.11.2023 in E.A.C.F.No.1948 of 2023 in E.P.No.1 of 2021 in O.P.No.5 of 2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Peddapalli, the lower court observed that the deceased father of the petitioner left behind not only the petitioner but also his wife and other children and that the petitioner did not implead those other legal heirs. Apart from that, the petitioner did not file the alleged will deed before the executing court. It is also observed by the lower court that the petitioner did not file any document to show that the petitioner is entitled to receive the entire share of compensation 4 SN,J CRP_1397_2024 of his deceased father excluding the other legal heirs of his late father.
9. The main contention of the petitioner is that as per the order in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in L.A.A.S.No.193 of 2015 he is the only legal representative of his deceased father since his father had executed will deed in his favour. The copy of that order is not filed along with the revision petition irrespective of it, when the question relates to entitlement to receive the share of compensation of the deceased father of the petitioner, this Court opines that the other legal representatives are necessary parties to the cheque petition. That is why the lower court asked for family members certificate. Simply because the petitioner was brought on record as legal representative of his deceased father in the appeal on the strength of will deed, it does not follow that he is entitled to receive the entire share amount of compensation of his deceased father, without hearing the other legal heirs of his deceased father to know if they do not have any objection for issuance of the cheque in his favour. The petitioner is therefore directed to implead the other legal heirs of his deceased father as respondents in the cheque petition and file the copy of the will deed. On such impleadment and filing of the will deed, the lower 5 SN,J CRP_1397_2024 court shall register the petition and pass orders on the petition in accordance with law.
10. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed off accordingly.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
___________________________ MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA 26.04.2024 Yvkr