Madras High Court
R.Balu Achari vs Somu Achari on 2 March, 2022
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated :02.03.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
T.O.S.No. 22 of 2009
1. R.Balu Achari
2. R.Kubendran ..Plaintiffs
-Vs-
Somu Achari ..Defendant
This Suit has been filed under Sections 232, 255 and 276 of the
Indian Succession Act XXXIX of 1925 for the grant of Letters of
Administration.
For Plaintiffs : M/s Menon & Goklaney Associates &
Lakshmi Manickam
For Defendant : Set ex-parte on 04.03.2021
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs have originally filed a petition in O.P.No. 290 of
2004, for grant of Letters of Administration. Since caveat has been filed on
21.07.2007, Registry was directed to verify and convert the said O.P. into
T.O.S., on 27.07.2009. Thereafter, the said petition was converted as a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
suit and was renumbered as T.O.S.No. 22 of 2009.
2. The case of the plaintiffs as stated in the Original Petition is as
follows:
(i) The defendant is one of the son of Rangachari born through
the first wife, viz., Navaneethammal [other legal heirs are, Indirani, expired in
the year 1986, Dilli Achari and Chandru Achari]. After the demise of
Navaneethammal in the year 1940, the said Rangachari married Savithri
Ammal. The plaintiffs, as well as one Lalitha and one Subramani are the
sons and daughter of Rangachari born through the second wife, viz.,
Savithri Ammal. The said Rangachari expired on 14.04.1986 at No.44,
S.M.V. Koil Street, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005, where he was ordinarily
then resided and he had possessed the properties within the state of
Tamilnadu. The last Will and Testament of late Rangachari was duly
executed by him on 10.05.1979 and was registered as Document No.11 of
1979 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Triplicane, Chennai in the presence
of the witnesses.
(ii) By the said Will, the deceased Rangachari appointed Savithri
Ammal, as sole executrix and she died on 24.09.1995 without having proved
the Will. Further, the Will has been signed by two witnesses, namely,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
M.Chandran and C.Sekar and both of the witnesses had expired, hence the
third party affidavit has been filed to prove the signature of the testator, as
no one is available to prove the signature of the attesting witnesses.
(iii) Also, the plaintiffs submits that there is no application made
to any district court or delegate or to any other High Court for Probate of any
Will of the said deceased or letters of administration with or without the Will.
Hence the plaintiffs prays to grant the relief as mentioned in the present
suit.
3. According to the learned counsel for the plaintiffs, the Will was
executed by Rangachari, father of the plaintiffs as well as defendant. Even
according to the learned counsel, provisions are also made to the Will and
the defendant remained ex-parte and the Will is also proved by submitting
necessary documents.
4. Further, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs contends that the
plaintiffs undertakes to duly administer the property and credits of the said
Rangachari deceased in any way concerning his Will by paying first his
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
debts and then the legacies therein bequeathed so far as the assets will
extend and to make a full and true inventory thereof and exhibit the same
before this Court within six months from the date of grant of letters of
administration. Therefore, the learned counsel for plaintiffs has sought for
grant of letters of administration in respect of the Will executed by
Rangachari.
5. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the plaintiffs
and perused the documents available on record.
6. The Original Petition has been filed in the year 2004.
Subsequent to that, after converting the said petition into the T.O.S., in the
year 2009, notice has been ordered and the same has been served on the
sole defendant on 09.10.2020. Despite repeated adjournments, the sole
defendant has not filed written statement. Hence the defendant was set
exparte on 04.03.2021 and the plaintiffs were directed to adduce Ex-parte
evidence.
7. Accordingly, 1st plaintiff, namely, Balu Achari adduced evidence
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
in his favour and on behalf of 2nd plaintiff as P.W.1 on 24.02.2022. He filed
a proof affidavit and he had stated in the proof affidavit that himself and the
2nd plaintiff are entitled for grant of letters of Administration and 7
documents, viz., Exhibits Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 were marked to prove the claim.
Among the documents filed by the plaintiffs, which were marked as Ex.P.1
to P.7, Ex.P.1 is the last Original Will, Ex.P.2 is the original death certificate
of Mr.Rangachari, who died on 14.04.1986. Ex.P.3 is the Original death
certificate of late Savithriammal and Ex.P.4 to Ex.P.7 are the consent
affidavits of the other legal heirs stating no objection to grant Letters of
Administration to the plaintiffs.
8. On a careful consideration of the oral and documentary
evidence, it is clear that the plaintiffs are the sons born to Rangachari and
Savithriammal. Further, the other legal heirs born to Rangachari and
Savithriammal, viz., R.Lalitha and R.Subramani and the other legal heirs
born to Rangachari and Navaneethammal, viz., R.Dilli Achari and
R.Chandru Achari had given their consent affidavits to grant letters of
administration to the plaintiffs, which is evident through Ex.P4 to Ex.P7.
Morever, one legal heir, namely, Indira, born to Rangachari and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
Navaneethammal died in the year 1986 and the other legal heir, viz.,
defendant remained Exparte. Further, Ex.P.1, which is the original Will has
also been marked.
9. In view of the above stated position and considering the fact
that the evidence of P.W.1 and documents filed on behalf of the plaintiffs
remain unchallenged and taking note of the fact that there is no rebuttable
evidence against the case of the plaintiffs and that the consent affidavits
have also been filed by the other legal heirs, except the defendant, who
remained exparte and one Indirani, who expired in the year 1986, this Court
is of the view that the plaintiffs have proved their case and entitled to the
grant of Letters of Administration.
10. Accordingly, the Testamentary Original Suit is ordered and a
direction is issued for the grant of Letters of Administration to the plaintiffs,
as the contesting witnesses, two persons, viz., M.Chandran and C.Sekar
are no more and as no one is available to prove the signature of the testator,
third party affidavit has been filed to prove the said signature of the testator.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
Moreover, the Will executed by the deceased Rangachari having effect
throughout the State of Tamil Nadu.
11. The plaintiffs are also directed to execute a Security bond for
a sum of Rs.25,000/- in favour of the Assistant Registrar (O.S.II) High
Court, Madras. The plaintiffs are further directed to render true and correct
accounts once in a year.
.03.2022
ssd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
Exhibits produced on the side of the plaintiffs:
S.No Exhibits Description
01 P-1 Original Will of late Rangachari
02 P-2 Original Death Certificate of late Rangachari
03 P-3 Original Death Certificate of late Savithriammal
04 P-4 Consent affidavit of Dilli Achari
05 P-5 Consent affidavit of Chandru Achari
06 P-6 Consent affidavit of Subramani Achari
07 P-7 Consent affidavit of Lalitha
Witness examined on the side of the plaintiffs:
P.W.1. - Mr.R.Balu Achari
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.
ssd
T.O.S.No. 22 of 2009
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
T.O.S.No.22 of 2009
02.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
