IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CIVIL REVISION No, 72008 (SB) APBI-ICANT lp :^^^ .^••-::^:^^':: '; ^. V^. • fL'i--1"6""' ^...^^' VERSUS 'NON-APPLICANTS -1< Mukku Kumar, ' Son of Ramgopal Tiwari, Aged About 34Years,ResidentofVillage Masturi, TahsilMasturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Superintandent Head PostOffice, Bilaspur, ' District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Shrawan Kumar Mishra, Son of Ramakant Mishra Aged about 24 Years, Resident of Khaparganj, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) / (AppillantinM.C.ANO.46/07)- General Public, (who relates to thiscase) CIVIL REV1SION UNDERSECTION3S8 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT 1925 READ WITH SECTIOW1150FCJVIL PROCEDURECODE fc ^ss 's^-y 9 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CrVILREVIiSION N0. 141/2008 APPLICANT VERSUS NON-APPUCANTS 03. Dhananjay @ Mukku Kumar, Son of Ramgopal Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years, Resident of Village Masturi; Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (ehhattisgarh). Su.perintandence, Head Post Office, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). • Shrawan Kumar Mishra, Son of Ramakant Mishra Aged about 24 Years, Resident of Khapargani, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). :. General .Public, (who relates to this case). , -;1';: :.. • :;, ' ^ 1 .: AND eiVILREVlSlONNo. 145/2008 APPUCANT VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS DUananjay @ Mukku Kumar, Son pf Ramgopal Tiwari, Aged About 34 Years, Resident 6f Village Masturi, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). Superinfandent, Head Post Offiee, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). . 2. Shrawati Kumar Misllra, Son of Ramakant Mishra Aged; about 24 Yea.rs, Resideht of Kha^ BUaspur District Bilaspur (Chfaattisgarh). .; • . : ; • . (Appillant in M.C.A; No. 46/07). ; 3. General Public, (wtlo relates to this case). :-. • ; ' . '^ ^''; ::.' CIVIL REVISION IJNDER S'^ITON 388 OF 'rHElNblAN SU<SGESSION ACT 1925 READ WITH SEC'RON 3t 15 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. (SB:Hon'1ilelVIhT.P.Sharma,J.)^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Present: - Mr. Sahdeep Dubey, Advocate for fhe applicant (in Civil Reyision Nos. 141/2008 8s145/2008). Ms. Fouzia.Mirza, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 (in CivU RevislonNps. 141/2008 85 145/2008). Mr; M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 (in; CivU Revision Nos. 141/2Q08& 145/2008). . . None fbr the Tespondeilt No. 3. (in CivU RevisioraNos. 1417200885 145/2008). ^SK'VSVKF'K!'-^^ 2.1 ;*-"-<a a: 'Wvsf 'w.^ ':v^i' ORAL-ORDER (Passedon 28/10/2010) 1. Heard. 2. Since both the civil revisions i.e. Civil Revision Nos. 141/2008 & 145/2008 filed against the common judgment dated 7/8/2007 passed by First Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in M.C.A.Nos. 49/2007 SE 46/2007 against the succession order dated 21/3/2007 passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur in succession case No. 06/2005 are being 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 District Judge, Bilaspur in M.C.A. Nos. 49/2007 SE 46/2007 against the order dated 21/3/2007 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 applieant 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 Kuinar Mishra was recorded as nominee. Smt. Annapurna Awasthi was died thereafter Smt. Durga Tiwari died. Application for issuance of succession certificate was filed by present applicant, same was rejected by respQndent No. 2 Shrawan Kumar Mishra on the 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 cerdficate 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 respondentNo. 2. 6. Learned counsel for the parties are heard. 7. Order impugned and record o^fboth the Courts below perused. 8. Leamed counsel for the applicant submits that after death of Smt. Annapurna Awasthi joint aceount holder during life time of Smt. Durga Tiwari. Smt. Durga Tiwari become full owner of the property i.e. money ( ^ 1 °%3 ^J Jf'ff '-^•'' deposited in account and after her death her only successor present applicant is entitled for grant of succession certificate but by dismissing his claim Court below has failed to exefcise the jurisdiction vested on it. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No.l submits that they are ready to give nioney in accordance with 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. Annapurna Awasthi he is entitled for all amount deposited in the post office. 11. As per pleading and record, joint account was in the name of Smt. Annapurna Awasthi and Sint. 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 Smt. Durga Tiwari on the basis of nominee he is not entitled for issuance of succession certificate in his name. In these circumstances 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 8s 145/2008 are allowed. Order impugned passed by lower appellate court is hereby set-aside. Order passed by 3rd Civil Judge Class-1, Bilaspur is partly modified and application filed on behalf of the applicant is allowed. Succession certificate for entire amount deposited in post office in the account of '^M-fr * Smt. Durga Tiwariibe issued in the naine of present applicant. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^\'y