- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4201 OF 2025 (ISA) BETWEEN: SRI. T.Y. NAGARAJU S/O LATE YALLAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT TADASEEGHATTA VILLAGE DODDABELE POST TYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.N.SURESH BABU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. T.H. NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O LATE T. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO.06, SRI. LAXMINARASIMMA SWAMY NILAYA, 3RD MAIN ROAD HAVANUR EXTENSION HESARAGHATTA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560 073 2. SRI. T.H. RAMAKRISHNAPPA S/O LATE T. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 3. SRI. CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE T. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 R/AT TADASEEGHATTA VILLAGE DODDABELE POST TYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARALA V.M, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 299 INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.03.2025 PASSED IN P AND SC NO. 28/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 278 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant-petitioner has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 11th March 2025 in P & SC No.20/2024 passed by the IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, dismissing the petitioner's petition filed under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (in short `the ISA Act') seeking to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 grant letters of administration in respect of the Will dated 23.10.2019 said to have been executed by late T.Hanumanthaiah. 2. The petitioner filed petition before the Probate Court i.e. trial Court stating that petitioner and respondent nos. 1 to 3 are Hindus governed by the provisions of Hindu Mitakshara law. It is stated that one late T.Hanumanthaiah was the absolute owner in possession of agricultural land bearing Sy.No.79/2 measuring 1acre 8 guntas situated at Tadaseeghatta Village. He acquired the said property under a partition dated 7.3.1960 effected between himself and his brothers. During his lifetime, khatha was standing in his name. The petitioner was having close proximity with the family of deceased Hanumanthaih and always treated as one among the family. It is the petitioner who used to take care of deceased Hanumnanthaih during his lifetime. Even the petitioner was taking care of the property also. Out of love and affection, deceased T. Hanumanthaaiah executed a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 Will on 23.10.2019 in favour of the present petitioner bequeathing the schedule property in his name. Son of late Hanumanthaiah was the one of the attesting witnesses to the said Will. He died on 3.2.2024. With this prayer, the petitioner has sought to issue of letters of administration with respect to the said property. 3. Before the probate Court, to substantiate the assertions made by the petitioner, he was examined as PW.1 and also examined one attesting witnesses by name Chandrappa and got marked Ex.P1 to P8. Respondents 1 to 3 appeared before the probate Court but, have submitted no objection to issue of letters of administration as prayed for by petitioner. Even the citation also came to be issued by way of paper publication. None of the objectors appeared. 4. On hearing the arguments of counsel for the petitioner, learned Probate Court dismissed the petition on the ground, that as the petitioner has sought letter of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 administration in respect of said Will dated 23.10.2019, the petitioner did not disclose the cause of action to issue letters of administration and also discussed with regard to the provisions of 218 of the ISA Act which defines issuance of letters of administration. Hence, on that ground, the petition was dismissed. 5. Being aggrieved by the said order, now the petitioner is before this Court. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have no objection. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, as the technical objection has been raised by the Probate Court with regard to the prayer so made by the petitioner, the petitioner ought to have prayed to grant to probate instead, but he has prayed for issuance of letters of administration. Therefore, he may be permitted to amend the petition before the Probate Court itself and seek appropriate relief. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 7. Section 218 in Chapter-I of the ISA Act particularly speaks of grant of probate and letters of administration. This Section 218 speaks of to whom the letters of administration may be granted etc., Now the petitioner intends to seek the Probate based upon the Will executed by the deceased T. Hanumanthaiah. 8. Section 276 of the ISA speaks application for probate. For compliance of provisions of 276 of ISA, the petitioner now seeks remand of this petition by setting aside the impugned order and permit him to seek necessary amendment for issuance of probate. 9. In view of Section 218 of the ISA, as the petitioner ought not have prayed for the issuance of letters of administration, the correct relief ought to have been sought by the petitioner for issuance of probate as contemplated under the provisions of ISA Act. The amendment is quite necessary. Therefore, in view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26117 MFA No. 4201 of 2025 petitioner, in the interest of promoting the justice, it is just and proper to set aside the impugned and remand the matter to the Probate Court with a direction to the petitioner to seek necessary amendment to the petition. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The Appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 11.3.2025 in P & SC No. 28/2024 passed by the IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside. . (iii) The petition is remanded to the trial Court with a direction to the trial Court to permit the petitioner to seek necessary amendment to the petition and to proceed further in accordance with law. No costs. Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE SK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7