IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2008 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1930 MSA.No. 1 of 2008() ------------------- AS.316/2004 of III ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM OPSUC.47/2000 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- K.KRISHNAMMA, W/O.DAMODHARAN PILLAI PLAMOOTTU HOUSE, TC.29/1468, M.K.K.NAIR ROAD, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.HEMALATHA SMT.SHIRMILA. C.S. SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.SANTHAMMA, W/O.R.JANARDHANAN, R/AT.TC.29/1466, M.K.K.NAIR ROAD, PALKULANGARA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. K.RADHAMONY, W/O.SUKUMARANNAIR R/AT.SAKTHI BHAVAN, TC.8/377, TELEPHONE EXCHANGE LANE, SREEKARIYAM.PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS MISC. SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2008, THE COURT ON 28/10/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ................................................... M.S.A. No. 1 of 2008 ................................................... DATED: 28-10-2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner who was the counter petitioner in O.P. (Succ. ) No. 47 of 2000 on the file of the I Addl. Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram challenges the decisions rendered by the courts below concurrently issuing a succession certificate to petitioners 1 and 2 before the trial court in respect of the four items of debts left behind by their brother deceased Kuttappan Nair. 2. The facts which were either proved or admitted are the following:- Kuttappan Nair who was a bachelor died intestate leaving behind him his three sisters Krishnamma the appellant and Santhamma and Radhamony who were the petitioners before the trial court. He had an elder sister by M.S.A. No. 1 of 2008 -:2:- name Sarojini Amma, who had pre-deceased him. The Succession O.P. was filed by the said two sisters on 21-6- 2000. The appellant who was the respondent in the succession O.P. opposed the issue of a succession certificate in respect of two of the deposits namely, items 1 and 3 contending inter-alia that they were gifted to the appellant who had received the same from the post office and the State Bank of Tranvancore respectively on 22-6- 2000. Parties were at issue only with regard to the aforesaid two items scheduled to the original petition and both the courts below have held that the two items of deposits were also left behind by deceased Kuttappan Nair and liable to be covered by the succession certificate since the O.P. was filed on 21-06-2000 and withdrawal of those two items of deposits namely items 1 and 3 was made only subsequent to the filing of the original petition. The appellant had a contention that since the disputed deposits were not scheduled in the O.P. filed on 21-6-2000 and were included in the schedule only after the withdrawal of M.S.A. No. 1 of 2008 -:3:- the amounts by the appellant from the respective banks, no succession certificate can be issued in respect of those two securities. This contention was repelled by the courts below. Succession certificate issued in this case is to relate back to 21-6-2000 on which date all the four deposits were pending. The appellant was only a nominee in respect of two deposits in question and the case of the appellant that those two deposits in question were gifted by deceased Kuttappan Nair is a matter which could not have been gone into or adjudicated upon by the courts below . The question of title will have to be primarily gone into in a regular suit before the civil court. It is open to the applicants to sue the appellant for recovery of those two deposits and the appellant also can institute a suit for declaration that those two deposits absolutely belong to her. As rightly observed by the lower appellate court the succession certificate merely clothes the holder of the succession certificate with an authority to to realise the debts of the deceased and get a valid discharge. If M.S.A. No. 1 of 2008 -:4:- there is a dispute regarding the title the same has to be resolved only in a civil suit between the parties. I, therefore, do not find any question of law, much less any substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal enabling this Court to interfere with the orders passed by the courts below. This appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine. Dated this the 18th day of October 2008. V.RAMKUMAR, Judge. Ani/ M.S.A. No. 1 of 2008 -:5:-