- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 100989 OF 2021 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. NEELAWWA W/O. ADIVEPPA KALLOLI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: YADAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE. 2. SMT. TANGEWWA W/O. HANAMAPPA GASTI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: MANTUR VILLAGE,TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE. 3. SMT.PADDAWWA W/O. VENKAPPA JALAGERI, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: YADAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST BAGALKOTE. 4. GOVINDAPPA S/O. ADIVEPPA KALLOLI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YADAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE. 5. KRISHNAPPA S/O. ADIVEPPA KALLOLI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YADAHALLI VILLAGE,TQ: MUDHOL, DIST BAGALKOTE. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PAVAN B DODDATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER JAMKHANDI, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 2. THE TAHASILDAR, MUDHOL TQ: MUDHOL,DIST: BAGALKOTE-587313. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, LOKAPUR TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587313. 4. SMT.KASHAWWA W/O. ADIVEPPA KALLOLI AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. JANAMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. 5. SMT.HANAMAWWA W/O NAGAPPA GOUDAR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. JANAMATTI VILLAGE,TQ BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. 6. SOMAPPA S/O. ADIVEPPA KALLOLI AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JANAMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. 7. SMT.KUSHNAWWA W/O. DUNDAPPA HIRAKANNAVAR AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: JANAMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116 C/O HALAGALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. 8. SMT.PARWATEWWA W/O. BALAPPA HANCHINAL AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: JANAMATTI VILLAGE, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. C/O. BALLUR. R.C. MUDHOL, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: MUDHOL. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA; SRI. PRANAV BADAGE FOR SRI. S.B. HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R8) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.10.2020 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 BEARING NO.KAR.MSC/CR-86/2019-20 VIDE ANNEXURE-D. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 22.10.2020 passed by the Respondent No.1 bearing No.Kar.MSC/CR-86/2019- 20 vide Annexure-D in the interest of justice and equity. b) Pass any other order/direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to pass, in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Shri Pavan B.Doddatti, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Shri T.Hanumareddy, learned AGA appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3; Shri Pranav Badage for Shri S.B. Hebballi, learned counsels appearing for respondent Nos.4 to 8. 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: The petitioners, permanent residents of Yadahalli Village, Mudhol Taluk, Bagalkot District, on the death of their father, apply for a survivorship and death certificate. The survivorship - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 and death certificate, in accordance with law, is granted by the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar. The 5th respondent calls the said grant of survivorship by the Tahsildar by filing an appeal before the 1st respondent-Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner, entertains the challenge, considers the issue, holds that he does not have jurisdiction, but even then remits the matter back to the hands of the Tahsildar for consideration afresh, after hearing all the parties. This is called in question by beneficiaries of the order of the Tahsildar in the subject petition. SUBMISSIONS: PETITIONERS: 4. The learned counsel Shri Pavan B.Doddatti appearing for the petitioners submits that the Assistant Commissioner does not have jurisdiction under the scheme of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for short). The State has issued a Circular, directing that any Assistant Commissioner should desist from entertaining a challenge to the survivorship certificate or death certificate and the remedy would lie before the competent Civil Court. The learned counsel - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 submits, the Assistant Commissioner, has therefore passed an order without jurisdiction. RESPONDENTS: 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.5 to 8, who approached the Assistant Commissioner challenging the survivorship certificate and the death certificate, would however, seek to defend the action of the Assistant Commissioner contending that the Assistant Commissioner has only remanded the matter and has not considered any issue on its merit. Therefore, this Court should not interfere with a remand order. 6. Learned AGA also would toe the lines of the learned counsel Shri Pranav Badage, who appears for respondent Nos.5 to 8. 7. I have given my anxious considerations to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 CONSIDERATION: 8. The controversy lies in a narrow compass. The pivotal issue that arises for consideration is: “Whether the Assistant Commissioner possesses the jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to a survivorship certificate and a death certificate issued by the Tahsildar in accordance with law? 9. Survivorship certificate is dealt with under Section 372 of the Act. It reads as follows: “372. Application for certificate.—(1) Application for such a certificate shall be made to the District Judge by a petition signed and verified by or on behalf of the applicant in the manner prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for the signing and verification of a plaint by or on behalf of a plaintiff, and setting forth the following particulars, namely:— (a) the time of the death of the deceased; (b) the ordinary residence of the deceased at the time of his death and, if such residence was not within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Judge to whom the application is made, then the property of the deceased within those limits; (c) the family or other near relatives of the deceased and their respective residences; (d) the right in which the petitioner claims; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 (e) the absence of any impediment under Section 370 or under any other provision of this Act or any other enactment, to the grant of the certificate or to the validity thereof if it were granted; and (f) the debts and securities in respect of which the certificate is applied for. (2) If the petition contains any averment which the person verifying it knows or believes to be false, or does not believe to be true, that person shall be deemed to have committed an offence under Section 198 of the Indian Penal Code. (3) Application for such a certificate may be made in respect of any debt or debts due to the deceased creditor or in respect of portions thereof.” (Emphasis supplied) Section 372 of the Act holds that the application for a succession certificate shall be made to the District Judge by a petition in a manner as prescribed under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. 10. In furtherance of the Act, the State has also issued a Circular directing the Assistant Commissioners not to entertain the challenge to the orders passed by the Tahsildar under Section 372 of the Act – granting survivorship certificate or a death certificate in terms of its Circular dated 12-03-2008. The relevant clauses of the Circular read as follows: “GvÀÛgÀ fë ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ®Ä vÀºÀ²Ã¯ÁÝgÀgÀÄ C¢üPÁgÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà PÁAiÉÄÝAiÀÄ°è ºÉýgÀĪÀÅ¢®è. India - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 Succession Act PÀ®A 372gÀ CrAiÀÄ°è ‘Succession Certificate’ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ‘Survivorship Certificate’ (GvÀÛgÀ fë ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæ) ¨ÉÃgÉ ¨ÉÃgÉAiÀiÁVgÀÄvÀÛªÉ. M§â ªÀåQÛ wÃjPÉÆAqÁUÀ DvÀ£À ¥ÁzÀ¸ÀÄzÁgÀgÀÄ AiÀiÁgÉA§ÄzÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ PÁAiÉÄÝUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÉüÀÄvÀÛªÉ. 2) £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ ¤ÃqÀĪÀ ‘Succession Certificate’ ªÀÄÈvÀ£À IÄt¨sÁgÀUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. PÀÄlÄA§ GvÀÛgÀ fë ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæªÀÅ ¹Ã«ÄÃvÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀÄÝ, ªÀÄgÀt ºÉÆA¢zÀ ªÀåQÛAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀ DvÀ£À PÀÄlÄA§zÀ ¸ÀgÀ¼À ªÁgÀ¸ÀÄzÁgÀgÀ£ÀÄß UÀÄgÀÄw¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß ¥Àæ²ß¹zÀ ¥Àæ¸ÀAUÀzÀ°è, £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ wÃ¥ÀÅð CAwªÀĪÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. 3) ¸ÀPÁðj ¥ÀvÀæ ¸ÀA: Dgïr 493 JJ¸ïr 97, ¢£ÁAPÀ:-14-5-99 gÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ®èzÀªÀjUÉ' GvÀÛgÁ¢üPÁj ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀĪÀ ¤ÃqÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß FUÀ EgÀĪÀAvÉAiÉÄà £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ ªÁå¦ÛUÉ ©lÄÖPÉÆlÄÖ AiÀÄxÁ¹ÜwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɹPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃUÀĪÀAvÉ J¯Áè «¨sÁUÁ¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVzÉ. GvÀìªÁVPÁj ¥ÀæªÀiÁt ¥ÀvÀæzÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀjUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ G½zÀªÀjUÉ ¨ÉÃgÉ ¨ÉÃgÉ ¤®ÄªÀ£ÀÄß vÀ¼ÉAiÀÄĪÀÅzÀÄ vÁgÀvÀªÀÄåªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁrzÀAvÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F vÁgÀvÀªÀÄå ºÉÆÃUÀ¯Ár¸À®Ä ¸ÀPÁðgÀªÀÅ ¥Àj²Ã°¹vÀÄ.” Section 372 of the Act unequivocally clarifies the distinction between a succession certificate issued by a competent civil Court under the Act and a survivorship certificate issued by the Tahsildar for a limited administrative purpose. The Circular further, in unmistakable terms, declares that disputes relating to survivorship are to be adjudicated exclusively by the Civil Courts and that revenue authorities have no adjudicatory role in such matters. The legislative intent is clear, categorical and admits no ambiguity. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 11. In the teeth of the statutory mandate and the binding executive circular, the impugned action of the Assistant Commissioner, in entertaining the challenge and passing a remand order stands vitiated for want of jurisdiction. Once an Authority is found to lack jurisdiction, it cannot pass any order, whether interlocutory, remand or otherwise. Jurisdiction is not a matter of degree, it either exists or it does not. Any order passed de hors jurisdiction is a nullity in the eye of law. 12. The circular is unequivocal and is indicative of the fact that a succession certificate issued by the Tahsildar cannot be questioned before the Assistant Commissioner, but only before a competent Civil Court. 13. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 8 would now submit that a civil suit is already filed by the petitioner. Therefore, all the proceedings would remain subject to the civil suit in O.S. No.246 of 2021. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17324 WP No. 100989 of 2021 14. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 22.10.2020 passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-D stands quashed. (iii) The parties are at liberty to avail of such remedy, as is available in law. VNP / CT: ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3 Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE