Rupendra Singh vs Saroj

The instant revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.10.2019 passed by the Civil Judge, Tibbi, District Hanumangarh, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was dismissed.

Brief facts giving rise to this revision petition are that respondent-plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 filed a declaration suit before the trial Court with a prayer that the plaintiffs and respondent No.4-Kulvindra Kaur may be declared legal heirs of late Gurcharan Singh.

All the petitioner-defendants after putting appearance filed their written statements and the trial Court framed issues on 19.11.2018. Thereafter, petitioner-Rupendra Singh filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC with the averments that the suit has been filed by the respondent-plaintiffs for declaring the plaintiffs as legal heirs of deceased-Devendra Singh. The trial Court is not competent to issue such certificate but the same can only be granted by the Court of District & Sessions Judge under the provisions of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by law. The plaintiffs filed their reply and denied the averments made in the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The trial Court dismissed the application preferred by the petitioner-defendants. Hence, this revision petition is filed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the relief sought in the suit can only be granted by the Court of District Judge under the provision of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and hence, the suit filed by the petitioner praying for declaring the plaintiff as legal heirs of the deceased-Devendra Singh is barred by law.

Heard and considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

The main thrust of the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the relief sought in the suit can only be granted by the District Judge under the provision of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. A perusal of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 shows that under this provision, a succession certificate is granted by the District Judge with respect to any debt or security.

In the present suit, the respondent-plaintiff has claimed relief only for declaration of legal heirs of late Gurcharan Singh, which is not with regard to any debt or security, therefore, the trial Court has not committed any error in rejecting the application.

It is also relevant to mention here that the relief sought by the plaintiff in the present suit is not within the purview of provision of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

Accordingly, the revision petition has no force and is hereby rejected.