TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shekar and his wife Damayanthi in the year 1970. In the cause title of the writ petition, the petitioner's age is described as 51 years. If that is so, the petitioner might have been born somewhere in the year 1971. Therefore, it would be highly difficult to believe that the petitioner was taken in adoption by Chandrashekar and his wife in the year 1970. Prima facie it appears that the petitioner has misrepresented before the trial court and by concealing the material facts she has obtained a certificate under Section 372 of the Act and the trial court having appreciated this aspect of the matter in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 151 of CPC has rightly directed the petitioner to re-deposit the amount of Rs.17,69,332/-, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Pragathi Krishna Grameena Bank (for short PKG Bank ), Sedam Branch. The petitioner had contended that Chandrashekar's wife Smt.Damayanthi Bai had pre-deceased him on 07.03.2014. After the death of Chandrashekar, petitioner had approached the Bank authorities, who had directed her to produce the succession certificate and accordingly, she had approached the court of Senior Civil Judge at Sedam in P SC No.1/2016 under Section 372 of the Act. The said petition was allowed on 8th August 2017 and a succession certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner in respect of the amounts mentioned in the schedule of the petition after collecting necessary charges and obtaining indemnity bond from the petitioner. 3. The respondents here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to the succession certificate, which was issued to her in P SC No.1/2016. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner is before this court. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a mistake in the proceedings filed under Section 372 of the Act and the petitioner was wrongly described as sister of deceased Chandrashekar, but in fact, she is the sister of Chandrashekar's wife and she was taken in adoption by late Chandrashekar and his wife Damayanthi in the year 1970. He submits that the amount has been withdrawn by the petitioner in the year 2017 and at this juncture, she is not in a position to re-deposit the said amount and therefore, he submits that the petitioner may be directed to furnish necessary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by mistake and actually she is the sister of the wife of deceased Chandrashekar, considering the nature of averments made in the petition and the evidence led in the proceedings filed under Section 372 of the Act, prima facie it is difficult to accept the said contention of the petitioner. Further, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has also pointed out to this court by placing necessary material that the petitioner had earlier filed proceedings before the Revenue Authorities for the purpose of obtaining a legal heir certificate and even in the said proceedings, she had described herself as the sister of Chandrashekar. 9. Having regard to the said material on record, it would be difficult to accept the contention of the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
