Madras High Court
(Unithali) Ramutti And Anr. vs (Kuttala) Padmanabha Chetti on 2 December, 1931
Equivalent citations: AIR1932MAD301, AIR 1932 MADRAS 301
JUDGMENT Reilly, J.
1. I see no reason to hold that an executor appointed by a will for which probate need not be obtained and has not been obtained, is exempted from the requirement of Section 214, Succession Act to produce a succession certificate before he can get a decree for a debt due to the testator's estate. The words of the section appear to me clearly to include such an executor. It is contended by Mr. Govinda Menon that such an executor does not claim on succession" within the meaning of the section. But not only would these words in their ordinary meaning include such a testator: Clause b(1) of the section includes among persons "so claiming," i.e. on succession, executors who have obtained probate. The opinion of the Full Bench in Ramiah v. Venkatasubbamma A.I.R. 1926 Mad. 434, regarding the vesting of the testator's property in an executor by a will for which prebate is unnecessary, does not affect this question; and it may be noticed that in that case the opinion of Wallis, C.J., in Balkrishnadu v. Narayanaswamy Chetty A.I.R. 1914 Mad. 51, that such an executor must obtain a succession certificate before he can get a decree for a debt is quoted with approval.
2. This petition is dismissed.
3. Time for obtaining the certificate is extended by two months from this date.