Karnataka High Court
Sri K Gururaj vs The Janatha Co Operative Bank Ltd on 30 June, 2023
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:22612
MFA No. 2603 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2603 OF 2021 (ISA)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI K GURURAJ
S/O LATE P S KRISHNAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/A NO.3268, JAGADHATRI
4TH CROSS, C BLOCK
2ND STAGE, GAYATHRINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 021.
2. SRI K VIJAYADAS
SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS,
2(A) SMT. NAGARATHNA S. N
W/O LATE K. VIJAYADAS
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O NO. 583/A, 10TH D CROSS,
2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD,
Digitally MAHALAKSHMIPURAM,
signed by BANGALORE - 560 086.
LEELAVATHI
SR
2(B) NAVANEETA K V
Location: High
Court of S/O LATE K. VIJAYADAS
Karnataka AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/O NO. 583/A, 10TH D CROSS,
2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BANGALORE - 560 086.
2(C) SRIVATSA. K. V
S/O LATE K. VIJAYADAS
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/O NO. 583/A, 10TH D CROSS,
2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:22612
MFA No. 2603 of 2021
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BANGALORE - 560 086.
2(D) SUMANTH K. V.
S/O LATE K. VIJAYADAS
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
R/O NO. 583/A, 10TH D CROSS,
2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BANGALORE - 560 086.
3. SMT. K. BHARATHI
D/O LATE P. S. KRISHNAMURTHY
W/O LATE PANDURANGA RAO
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT NO. 315, 13TH CROSS
WEST OF CHORD ROAD
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
RAJAJINAGAR, 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 086.
4. SRI. ADITHYA K P
S/O LATE K. P DAS
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
R/AT NO. 315, 13TH CROSS
WEST OF CHORD ROAD
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
RAJAJINAGAR 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 086.
5. SRI. ARUN K P
S/O LATE K P DAS
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT NO. 315, 13TH CROSS
WEST OF CHORD ROAD
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
RAJAJINAGAR 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 086.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RANGANATHA S JOIS.,ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:22612
MFA No. 2603 of 2021
AND:
THE JANATHA CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD
WEST OF CHORD ROAD BRANCH
BENGALURU-560 086.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SAILESH S KATAREY.,ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 384 OF INDIAN
SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 AGAINST THE ORDER DT.10.12.2020
PASSED IN P AND SC NO.44/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE VII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH-19),
BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION UNDER SECTION 372 OF
THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated
10.12.2020 passed in P & SC No.44/2020 by the VII Addl.City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, whereby the said petition filed by
the appellants seeking grant / issuance of succession certificate in
relation to the movable assets / properties of late K.Haridas was
dismissed by the trial court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.
3. The material on record discloses that the appellants are
the class-II heirs of late K.Haridas, who died unmarried, issueless
NC: 2023:KHC:22612
MFA No. 2603 of 2021
and intestate on 21.08.2017 leaving behind the appellants to
succeed to his estate as his only heirs and legal representatives. At
the time of his demise, the said late K.Haridas had the subject
deposits, accounts, etc., in the respondent - Bank, who refused to
release / disburse the said amounts in favour of the appellants,
who instituted the aforesaid P & SC No.44/2020 before the trial
court seeking issuance / grant of succession certificate in their
favour. Though, the said petition was not opposed by the
respondent - Bank, the trial court proceeded to pass the impugned
order dismissing the petition, aggrieved by which, appellants are
before this Court by way of the present appeal.
4. The material on record discloses that despite the
unimpeached, uncontroverted and unchallenged pleadings and
evidence of the appellants, which clearly established that apart
from them, the late K.Haridas did not leave behind any heirs / legal
representatives and though there were no rival claimants in relation
to the subject / schedule properties, the trial court clearly
committed an error in dismissing the petition filed by the appellants
by passing the impugned order, which is not only contrary to the
material on record but also well settled principles of law governing
NC: 2023:KHC:22612
MFA No. 2603 of 2021
grant / issuance of succession certificate and consequently, the
impugned order deserves to be set aside and the petition filed by
the appellants deserves to be allowed.
5. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) Appeal is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 10.12.2020 passed in P & SC
No.44/2020 by the trial court is hereby set aside and consequently,
the said petition filed by the appellants stands allowed.
(iii) The trial court is directed to issue succession certificate in
favour of the appellants as sought for in the petition forthwith
immediately without any delay.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SV/SRL
