- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6313 OF 2024 (ISA) BETWEEN: 1. PRAJWAL, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, R/BY HIS FATHER MINOR, GUARDIAN UMESH, S/O. SRI. NINGEGOWDA @ RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 2. ROHITH S/O. SHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, R/BY HIS FATHER MINOR, GUARDIAN SHEKAR, S/O. SRI. NINGEGOWDA @ RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 3. ARYAN S/O. JAYARAMA, AGED ABOUT 09 YEARS, R/BY HIS FATHER MINOR, GUARDIAN JAYARAMA, S/O. SRI. NINGEGOWDA @ RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 4. AKASH S/O. JAYARAMA, AGED ABOUT 07 YEARS, Digitally signed by SOWMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 R/BY HIS FATHER MINOR, GUARDIAN JAYARAMA, S/O. SRI. NINGEGOWDA @ RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O. HOSAKOPPALU VILLAGE, SHRAVANABELAGOLA VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 116. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VENKATESH R. BHAGAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NIL NIL …RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 384 INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.06.2023 PASSED IN P AND S.C.NO. 19/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN, (SIT AT CHANNARAYAPATNA), DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 278 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellants to certify minors who appear through the natural guardian under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (herein referred to as 'Act') for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 16.06.2023 passed by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan at Channarayapatna in P&SC No.19/2023 for having dismissed the petition filed by the appellants under Section 278 of the Act for receiving the probate and successor certificate. 2. The respondent is notified through paper publication. None appeared or filed any objection even in this Court or in the trial Court. 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants. 4. The case of the appellants is that they are the minors. Deceased Ningegowda alias Rajanna was their grandfather. He was the owner of the land bearing Sy. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 No.55/1 measuring 1 acre 15 guntas of Kodibelagola Village Shravanabelagola Hobli, Chennarayapatna Taluk, District Hassan. Due to the love and affection he had executed a registered Will in the name of the appellants jointly on 19.06.2018 and subsequently died. The parents of the minor appellants performed the last rites and later they came to know about the Will. 5. They approached Revenue Authorities to transfer the revenue records but the Revenue Authorities refused the same and they sought for probate and successor certificate. Accordingly, they approached the trial Court for the same. Amongst the appellants, the guardian was examined as PW2. They got marked 5 documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 and after hearing the arguments, trial Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the execution of Will is not proved as the appellants have not examined the contesting witnesses to the Will. Accordingly, the impugned order came to be passed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 6. Having heard the arguments and perused the records, to prove the Will under Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872, atleast one of the contesting witnesses has to be examined before the trial Court, but the appellants did not examine. However, learned counsel submits that due to some miscommunication, the appellants were not able to examine the contesting witnesses and they are ready to examine the contesting witness and prays for remanding the matter back. 7. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants and trial Court dismissed the petition only on the ground that contesting witness not being examined. However, there are no rival claims. In this case, except examining one of the contesting witnesses, nothing remains to contest the matter. The trial Court ought to have given the opportunity to examine contesting witnesses. However, it was dismissed by the trial Court. Therefore, to give an opportunity and interest of justice, the order of the trial - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4323 MFA No. 6313 of 2024 Court is set aside and the matter requires to be remanded back. This Court gives an opportunity to the appellants to examine contesting witnesses. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The order of trial Court dismissing the petition is set aside. The petition is restored to the original file at the cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited the before the District Legal Services Committee, at Channarayapatna. The appellants are permitted to examine the witnesses and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Sd/- (K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE DS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21