Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer

Cites 11 docs - [View All]

The Indian Succession Act, 1925
Section 214 in The Indian Succession Act, 1925
Section 214(1)(b) in The Indian Succession Act, 1925
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 214 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Citedby 1 docs
S.Gowri vs G.Mangammal on 7 August, 2009

Blog Links
powered by

User Queries
hindu succession act
power of attorney
indian succession act
probate
succession certificate
succession act
hindu succession
succession
sec 8 of hindu succession act
execution of decree
section 8 of hindu succession act
mysore
ramaswami
abatement
"power of attorney"
indian succession
section 8 hindu succession act
execution petition
rule 21
golden rule


Madras High Court
I. Basha Khan vs K. Selvaraj And Ors. on 11 November, 1998
Author: K Govindarajan
Bench: K Govindarajan
ORDER
K. Govindarajan, J.
1. One Hussain Bai got a decree in O. S. No. 536 of 1976 on the file of the District
Munsif Court, Attur against the respondents.
After obtaining the decree, he died. So, his wife Havab-Bi executed a power of
attorney in favour of the petitioner to institute the Execution Petition to recover the
decree amount from the respondents. The Court beiow on the basis of the objection
raised by the respondents rejected the Execution Petition in E.P. No. 3 of 1991 on the
ground that no succession certificate was produced under Section 214 of the Indian
Succession Act, Aggrieved, the petitioner havS filed the above Revision.
2. The only point that arises in this Revision for consideration is whether the wife of
the deceased decree-holder can proceed with the Execution Petition filed by her
power of attorney, without a succession certificate as contemplated under Section
214 of the said Act.
3. The execution proceedings cannot abate on the death of the deceased decree-
holder, in view of Order 22 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the legal
representatives can therefore continue the proceedings without filing separate
Execution petition by substitution themselves under Section 146 and Order 21, Rule
12 of the Code. Only if they want to file a fresh application they have to comply with
the requirement of Section 214 of the said Act, which reads as follows:--
"Proof of representative title acondition precedent to recovery through the Courts of
debts from debtors of deceased persons :--
(1) No Court shall-
(a) pass a decree against a debtor of a deceased person for payment of his debt to a
person claiming on succession to be entitled to the effects of the deceased person or
to any part thereof, or
(b) proceed, upon an application of a person claiming to be so entitled, to execute
against such a debtor a decree or order for the payment of his debt, except on the
production, by the person so claiming, of-
(i) a probate or letters of administration evidencing the grant to him of
administration to the estate of the deceased, or
(ii) a certificate granted under Section 31 or Section 32 of the Administrator-
General's Act, 1913, and having the debt mentioned therein, or
(iii) a succession certificate granted under Part X and having the debt specified
therein, or
(iv) a certificate granted under the Succession Certificate Act, 1889, or
(v) a certificate granted under Bombay Regulation No. VII of 1927 and, if granted
after the first day of May, 1889, having the debt specified therein.
(2) The word 'debt' in Sub-section (1) includes any debt except rent, revenue or
profits payable in respect of land used for agricultural purposes".
4. The amount sought to be recovered cannot be construed other than "debt" for the
purpose of the abovesaid provision. While construing the scope of the provision for
the purpose of filing the Execution Petition by the legal representative, in Basappa v.
Siddamma, AIR 1966 Mysore 198, the learned Judge has held as follows (para 5):--
"There is hardly any doubt that the respondent's claim for a share in the decree
amount is on the basis that she has also succeeded to the estate of the deceased.
Therefore she cannot proceed with the execution without the production of a
succession certificate. I see no conflict between Section 214 of the Indian Succession
Act and Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. The former lays down that no
execution petition shall be proceeded with without the production of a succession
certificate when a person claims a right in decree on the ground of succession,
whereas the latter regulates the succession to the estate of a deceased male Hindu
dying intestate. The Courts below, in my opinion, erred in thinking that the
requirements of Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act have been in any manner
modified by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act".
5. The Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in Nandlal v. Mahavir Kumar,
AIR 1974 Raj 189, took the similar view, and, while construing the right of the joint
decree holder to execute the decree, the learned Judge has held as follows (para 9):--
"The law-makers have put two conditions for a joint decree-holder to exercise his
right to execute the decree that the decree itself must not contain any condition
which may debar one decree-holder to take over the execution proceedings and
secondly that a person who wants to carry on the execution proceedings must do so
only when the execution is for the benefit of all the decree-holders, or, where any of
them has died, for the benefit of the survivors and the legal repesentatives of the
deceased. The right to take out execution does not arise out of this provision but it
arises out of the decree passed by a competent Court. It simply provides that a single
decree-holder has a right to take out execution proceedings if other decree-holders in
whose favour the decree is passed are not in a position to join him, but it should be
done only for the benefit of all, or, if any one of the decree-holders has died, then for
the benefit of the survivors and the legal representatives of the deceased. This
provision, therefore, does not come in conflict in any manner with the provisions of
Section 214 of the Indian Succession Act which, no doubt, creates a bar for carrying
out the execution without obtaining the succession certificate if the decree-holder
died. That provision can apply only when there is only one decree-holder and after
his death the execution can be taken out or carried out by his legal representatives
alone who under the decree have no right to take out execution proceedings unless
they have stepped in the shoes of the decree-holder by obtaining a succession
certificate".
6. K. Ramaswamy, J., as he then was as puisne Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High
Court, in the decision in Akula Rangappa v. Narayana Swamy, , while construing the
scope of Section
214(1)(b) of the Indian Succession Act, has held as follows (para 2):--
"If a fresh application has to be filed then it is necessary that the legal representatives
should obtain the succession certificate as enjoined under Section 214(1)(4) of the
Act. The golden rule that runs through the decisions of this Court is thus :--
(1) Where a decree-holder himself files an execution application and he dies before
executing the decree and recording the full satisfaction the legal representatives are
entitled to come on record without obtaining a succession certificate as required
under Section 214(1)(b) of the Act.
(2) Where the legal representatives themselves are seeking to execute the decree
obtained by the deceased decree-holder, then it is mandatory under Section 214(1)(b)
of the Act to obtain a succession certificate and then to have the decree executed".
7. Ramanujam, J., as he then was, in Ramanatha v. K. V. Kuppuswami, , while
construing the situation where the legal representatives wanted to continue the
execution proceedings has also discussed about the scope of Section 214(1)(b) of the
said Act and the necessity for filing succession certificate for initiating execution
proceedings, and held as follows (para 7) ;---
"An application filed by the legal represents tive to bring himself on record should be
treated as an application for substitution or for fresh execution and if so treated it
will attract the provisions of Section 214. But that in my view, does not make much
difference in the interpretation of the scope of Section 214. Section 214 specifically
bars the Court from proceeding with the execution on an application of a person
claim ing to be entitled to execute the decree.
It appears, therefore, that if is only when the legal representative files a fresh
application for execution, Section 214 will stand attracted and not when he seeks to
continue the execution petition initiated by the deceased decree-holder".
8. In view of the settled position of law, I find that no execution petition shall be
proceeded (initiated wich) without the production of succession certificate as
contemplated under Section 214(1)(b) of the Indian Succession Act. Hence the order
of the Court below cannot be interfered with, and this Revision is dismissed
accordingly. No costs.