%->, ^ iSSif. ga KK•a HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION N0. 141/2008 APPLICANT Dhananjay @ Mukku Kumar, Son of Ramgopal Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years, Resident of Village Masturi, j'ahsil Masturi, District Bifespur, (Chhattisgarh). ;. ; VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS Post pffice^ Bilaspur 03. Superintandence, Head BUaspur, District (Chhatdsgarh). Shrawaa Kumar Mishra, Son of Ramakant Mishra Aged about 24 Years, Resident of Khapargani, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). General Public, (who relates to this case). AND CIVIL REVISION No. 145/2008 APPLICANT Dhananjay @ Mukku Kumar, Son of Ramgopal Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years, Resident of Village Masturi, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). VERSUS NON-APPUCANTS Post Office, Bilaspur 1. Superintandpnt, Head Bilaspur, | District (Chhattisgarh). ' 2. Shrawaa Kumar Mishra, Son of| Ramakant IMishra Aged about 24; Years, Re^ident of Khapargani,; Bilaspur [ District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). (AppiUantinJkl.C.A. No. 46/07). 3. General Puj6lic, (who relates to this' case). ' CIVIL REVISION UNDER SE&ITON 388 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT 1925 READ WITH SECTION115 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. (SB -.Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present: - Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate for the applicant (in Civil Revision Nos. 141/2008 8s145/2008). Ms. Fouzia.Mirza, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 (in Civil Revision Nos. 141/2008 8s 145/2008). Mr. M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 (in Civfl RevisionNos. 141/2008 & 145/2008). None for the respondent No. 3. (ia CivU Revision Nos. 141/2008 & 145/2008). liilffi «sa ^?^ A^;' -ilf sfVi ^ is^.^i. -^ ESI^l'lf v?y'"^- '^'; Ri" ff: S-isc'5'7*!. g 1^"^ • ^^5' ^ ./r\ ORAL-ORDER (Passedon 28/10/2010) 1. Heard. 2. Since both the civil revisions i.e. Civil Revision Nos. 141/2008 8s 145/2008 ffled against the common judgment dated 7/8/2007 passed by First Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in M.C.A. Nos. 49/2007 8s 46/2007 against the succession order dated '21f3] 2007 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur in succession case No. 06/2005 are'^eing disposed of by this common order. • 3. By both the civil revisions, applicant has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 7/8/2007 passed by First Additional Dista-ict Judge, Bilaspur in M.C.A. Nos. 49/2007 8s 46/2007 against the order dated21/3/2007 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur in succession case No. 06/2005 whereby 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur has granted succession certificate in favour of the present applicant but same was reversed by Lower Appellate Court. 4. As per pleading of the parties joint account in the name of Smt. Annapurna Awasthi and Smt. Durga Tiwari since deceased was open by them in the post office in which respondent Shrawan Kumar Mishra was recorded as nominee. Smt. AnnapumaAwapthi was died fhereafter Smt. Durga Tiwari died. Application for issuance of succession certificate was filed by present applicant, same was rejfcycfed by respondent No. 2 Shrawan Kumar Mishra on sthe ground that he is nominee and heir of Smt. Annapurna Awasthi. 5. After providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties, 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur granted succession certificate of half of the amount i.e. Rs. 18,000/- in favour of the present applicant and denied the issuance of certificate for rest amount, same was challenged before the lower appellate Court by both the parties and lower appellate Court has allowed the appeal of respondent No. 2. i 6. Learned counsel for fhe parties are heard. 7. Order impugned and record of bofh the Courts below perused. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after deafh of Smt. Annapuma Awasthijoint account holder during life time of Smt. Durga Tiwari. Smt. Durga Tiwari become full owner of the property i.e. money —2» -ae\ .ij3 ;^ f.f \An/ deposited in account and after her deafh her only successor present applicant is entitled for grant of succession certificate but by dismissing his claim Court below has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested on it. 9. On the ofher hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.l submits that they are ready to give money in accordance wifh order of the Court. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 opposed both the civil revisions and submits that as a nominee and as a successor of Smt. Annapuma Awasthi he is entided for all amount deposited in the post office. 11. As per pleading and record, joint account was in the name of Smt. Annapuma Awasthi and Smt. Durga Tiwari. After death of Smt. Annapurna Awasthi only Smt. Durga Tiwari was account holder and after death of Smt. Durga Tiwari present applicant has filed application for grant of succession. Respondent No. 3 is not a heir of deceased S.mt. Durga Tiwari on fhe basis of nominee he is not entitled for issuance of succession certificate in his name. In these circymstances only present applicant Dhananjay @ Mukku Kumar nephew of deceased Smt. Durga Tiwari was entitled for issuance of certificate but both the Courts below has not considered the aforesaid legal position and thereby committed an illegality and has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested on it. Consequently, Civil Revision Nos. 141/2008 &, 1145/2008 are allowed. Order impugned passed by lower appellate court is hereby set-aside. Order passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspufis partly modified and application filed on behalf of the applicant is allowed. Succession cerdficate for entire amount deDOsited in post office in the account of -^Ali- " ' Smt. Durga Tiwa.ri.be issued in fhe name of present applicant. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P.Sharma Judge 1 ^