1 Application No.3899 of 2007 in O.P. No.178 of 1969 V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. This is an application taken out by one Mr.George Joseph Chambers, under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act, seeking revocation of the Letters of Administration ordered in O.P.No.178 of 1969 dated 26.3.1970, in respect of the last Will and Testament of one Mrs.Ida L.Chambers. 2. Heard Mr.G.R.S.Chander Rao, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr.M.Devendran, learned counsel appearing for the Administrator-General and Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the person who was ordered to be impleaded as second respondent in the present application A.No.3899 of 2007. 3. One Mr.George Alexander Chambers had a wife by name Ethel Mary Chambers. She died on 23.3.1924. Thereafter, he married one Margeret Agnes on 28.6.1924. She also died on 2.2.1927. Thereafter, he married the Testatrix, Ida L.Chambers on 18.12.1930. Mr.George Alexander Chambers died on 16.11.1937. 4. The first wife Ethel Mary Chambers had one son by name Mr.K.H.Chambers and 2 daughters by name Fellice Dora and Sheela Florence. The 2 second wife Margret Agnes had one son by name Roy Edwin Metcalf Chambers. The third wife, Ida L.Chambers (Testatrix) had no issues. 5. Ida L.Chambers executed a Will on 29.10.1949 and a Codicil on 3.6.1950. She died on 13.8.1968. The Testatrix had appointed the Chartered Bank as the Executors under the Will. After the Executors renounced Executorship, the Administrator-General and Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu took possession of the assets by virtue of an order passed in O.P.No.156 of 1968 under Section 10 of the Administrator-General's Act. Thereafter he filed the above O.P. No.178 of 1969 seeking the grant of Letters of Administration with the Will annexed, to have effect throughout the State of Tamil Nadu. This O.P., was filed under Section 18 of the Indian Administrator-General's Act. 6. One Dhanapal was examined as PW.1 in the O.P. He was one of the Attestors to the Codicil. He identified the signature of the Testatrix in the Will, which was marked as Ex.P.1 and also spoke about the execution and attestation of the Codicil. He also spoke about the attestation made by one Mr.Small in the Will. Therefore, upon being satisfied that the Will was proved, Palaniswamy, J., ordered the grant of Letters of Administration on 26.3.1970. In pursuance of the Letters of Administration so granted, the Administrator-General and Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu has already started administering the estate. 3 7. After more than 36 years of the grant of Letters of Administration, the applicant has come up with the present application, seeking its revocation on the ground that he is the son of K.H.Chambers, who himself was the son of George Alexander Chambers through his first wife Ethel Mary Chambers and that he had no notice of the Will being propounded. In other words, the applicant claims to be the son of the step-son of the Testatrix. 8. The main ground on which the applicant seeks revocation of the Letters of Administration is that no citation was issued to persons who ought to have been issued with citations and that his father K.H.Chambers was not even issued with a notice or impleaded as a party to the O.P. It is also contended by the applicant that the Will was not proved, inasmuch as the Attestors were not examined. 9. It is true that no citation or notice was issued to K.H.Chambers, in the O.P. But the same may not come within the purview of "just cause" for which, the revocation of the grant can be ordered under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act. As stated earlier, the Testatrix died on 13.8.1968 and the O.P., was filed in April 1969. It was ordered on 26.3.1970. At that time, Mr.K.H.Chambers (whom the applicant claims as his father) was alive. He died only on 29.11.1989, after 21 years of the death of the Testatrix and after nearly 20 years of the grant of the Letters of Administration. The properties left behind by the Testatrix were huge and Mr.K.H.Chambers never made any claim for the properties. The Testatrix had 4 bequeathed the properties only for public charitable and educational purposes and no bequest was made in favour of any individual. The beneficiaries named under the Will are (1) St. Dominic Convent of St. Thomas Mount, (2) Innaculate Conception Convent, Coimbatore, (3) Dumb, Deaf and Blind Convent, Madras, (4) St. Joseph CSI Convent, Cameren, South India and (5) Dr. Scadders Memorial Hospital, Ranipet. In such circumstances, the Administrator-General and Official Trustee started administering the properties from 1970 and a period of 38 years has now elapsed. Since the parties are Christians, the applicant, even if assumed to be the son of Mr.K.H.Chambers, was not one of the heirs who could have succeeded to the estate of the Testatrix, but for the Will. If at all, any one could have claimed a right by way of intestate succession, it was K.H.Chambers and his sisters or step-brother. None of them raised a little finger, during their lifetime, about the Will in question. Therefore, it is not open to the applicant, who was not a heir, to seek revocation of the Letters of Administration, since the person under whom he claims a right, himself did not assert his right for 20 years from the date of the grant till the date of his death. 10. As a matter of fact, it appears that the very lineage of the applicant appears to be in question. Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel produced a copy of the judgment of P.Jothimani, J., dated 1.2.2008, in W.P.Nos.33248 and 33249 of 2007, by which the legal heirship Certificate issued to the applicant herein was quashed and it was left open to the applicant to approach the competent Civil Court 5 for appropriate orders. So far, the applicant has not obtained any declaration from a Civil Court about his legal heirship to K.H.Chambers. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to seek revocation of the grant. 11. The second contention of the applicant regarding the non-examination of the attesting witnesses, cannot be accepted. As stated earlier, one Mr.Dhanapal who attested the Codicil was examined as PW.1 and he spoke about the execution and attestation of the Codicil. He also identified the signature of one of the attesting witnesses of the Will. Therefore, the Will was proved in a manner known to law. 12. Mr.G.R.S.Chander Rao, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon a lot of decisions in support of both of his contentions viz., (i) that the non issue of citation to a legal heir would come within the purview of "just cause" under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act and (ii) that the Will was not proved in accordance with Section 63, inasmuch as none of the Attestors was examined. 13. I do not wish to advert to the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant, for I have no quarrel with the first proposition that the non issue of citation to a legal heir who is entitled to succeed in the absence of a testamentary disposition, would be a just cause. But as I have observed earlier, the applicant's father Mr.K.H.Chambers (even if he was his father) did not assert his rights over the estate for 20 years from the date of the grant till the date of his 6 demise. Since the parties are Christians, the applicant did not acquire any right by birth in the estate left behind by his father's step-mother. Moreover, the paternity of K.H.Chambers for the applicant is itself in doubt. Therefore, on facts, those decisions have no application to the case on hand. 14. In so far as the second proposition is concerned, the law permits the examination of third parties, in the absence of the attesting witnesses. On facts, it is found that one of the attesting witnesses to the Codicil was actually examined as PW.1 and he also identified the signature of one of the attesting witnesses to the Will. Therefore, the other set of decisions relied upon by the learned counsel are also of no application. 15. In view of the above, there are no merits in the application and hence it is dismissed. 08-07-2008 Index : Yes/No. Internet: Yes/No. Svn V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. Svn 7 Order in Application No.3899 of 2007 in O.P. No.178 of 1969 08-07-2008