RAMKRISHNA CHANDA Vs. SRIKRISHNA CHANDA
LAWS(CAL)-2010-9-47
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on September 03,2010

RAMKRISHNA CHANDA Appellant
VERSUS
SRIKRISHNA CHANDA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Two revisional applications were filed by the petitioners herein. Both the applications were filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In one of such applications being C.O. No. 1643 of 2007 the petitioners have challenged an order being No. 55 dated 3rd February, 2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sealdah, in Title Execution Case No. 5 of 1996 whereby the petitioners' prayer for keeping the execution proceeding in abeyance till the disposal of the probate proceeding being O.S. No. 87 of 2001 was rejected by the learned Executing Court. In the other application being C.O. No. 2294 of 2010 the petitioners have prayed for issuance of direction upon the learned Probate Court for early disposal of their application for removal of the Administrator Pendentilite.
(2.) Let me now consider the merit of those two revisional applications one after another. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners as well as the opposite party No.1 filed an eviction suit against the proforma opposite party. The said suit was decreed on contest. An appeal was filed against the said decree by the tenant/opposite party No.2 but the said appeal was also dismissed on 14th May, 2002. Since the defendant/judgment debtor did not vacate the said property in compliance of the said decree, the said eviction decree was put into execution by the original decree holder. After the death of the original decree holder the opposite party No.1 was allowed to proceed with the said execution proceeding as he was appointed as an Administrator Pendentilite by the Probate Court on 19th July, 2001 in a probate proceeding being Original Suit No. 8 of 2001 which was filed by the opposite party No.1 herein, for grant of probate to the will left by his father namely the original decree holder herein.
(3.) The opposite party No.1 herein was appointed as an Administrator Pendentilite by the Probate Court in the probate proceeding on 19th June, 2001 vide order No. 3 on the following terms:- i) The Administrator shall prosecute and/or defend suits or proceedings concerning the estate; ii) Shall supervise the business, properly and maintain accounts; iii) Shall pay all rates and taxes; iv) Shall make an inventory of the materials of the business and shall submit a report of the inventory and submit accounts every six months.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.