- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1913 OF 2020 (ISA) BETWEEN: 1. SMT SUCHITHRA P J W/O LATE LOLAKSHA K AGED 31 YEARS 2. KUM MANISHA K L D/O LATE LOLAKSHA K AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND THE PETITIONER NO.1 SMT SUCHITRA P J PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT KUNTIKANA HOUSE KOLTHIGE VILLAGE PERLAMPADI POST PUTTUR TALUK D.K. - 574 223 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT POLAJE HOUSE KODIYALA VILLAGE AND POST BELLARE HOBLI SULLIA TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574 212 &APPELLANTS (BY SMT. LAKSHMI DEVI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 AND: 1. SMT ANUSUYA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O BABU GOWDA 2. JANARDHANA K AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O BABU GOWDA RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT KUNTIKANA HOUSE KOLTHIGE VILLAGE PERLAMPADI POST PUTTUR TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574 223 3. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA PUTTUR BRANCH PUTTUR TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574 201 4. THE SUB-POST MASTER PERLAMPADI SUB POST OFFICE KOLTHIGE VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK D K DISTRICT-574 212 5. THE POST MASTER BELLARE POST OFFICE BELLARE VILLAGE SULLIA TALUK D K DISTRICT-574212 &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY D., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 SRI. RAJESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3 NOTICES TO R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 384 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED. 28.10.2019, PASSED IN P AND SC.NO.06/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., PUTTUR, D.K., ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 372 OF INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is preferred by the petitioners in P & SC.No.06/2017 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Puttur, Dakshina Kannada ('Trial Court', for short) calling in question the order dated 28.10.2019 whereby the petition filed under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (8the Act9 for short) was allowed in part, granting succession certificate jointly in favour of the petitioners and respondent No.1. 2. Brief facts of the case are that: One Mr.Lolaksha K died on 11.05.2015 leaving behind, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 (i) wife (petitioner No.1), (ii) minor daughter (petitioner No.2), (iii) mother (respondent No.1) and brother (respondent No.2). The deceased had LIC and postal insurance policies. Initially, his father was nominated but he pre-deceased the deceased, and no fresh nomination was made. Petitioners sought release of benefits, but were directed to obtain a succession certificate, leading to filing of the petition under Section 372 of the Act. 3. The petitioners contended that they are the class I legal heirs and are entitled to benefits arising from the life insurance and postal insurance policies. Pursuant to the suit summons issued by the trial Court in P & SC.No.6/2017, the respondents appeared and filed their statement of objections. 4. Respondent No.2, the brother of Lolaksha filed objections stating that the petitioners are not only the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 class-I legal heirs of deceased-Lolaksha, but his mother and brother, are also the legal heirs of deceased Lolaksha. It is stated that the deceased had initially nominated his father Babu Gowda for the benefits of policy issued by the Life Insurance Corporation and since Babu Gowda predeceased the deceased, and the deceased having not made any other person as nominee, the respondents are also entitled for the benefits. 5. The trial Court based on the pleadings, framed the point for consideration. In order to substantiate their claim, the petitioners examined petitioner No.1 as PW.1, marked documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P7. On the other hand, respondent No.2 examined himself as RW1 and got marked documents at Ex.D16 to Ex.D25. 6. The trial Court upon appreciation of the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, arrived at a conclusion that the relationship between the parties is undisputed and they fall within the category of class I legal - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 heirs. It further held that since the earlier nominee (father) had pre-deceased and no fresh nomination was made, succession had to be governed by Law of Inheritance, not nomination. Thus, the Court held that the petitioners and respondent No.1 are entitled to succeed and respondent No.2 (brother) is not the class I heir, hence not entitled to share in succession certificate and arrived at the conclusion that the petitioners together are entitled to 2/3rd share and respondent No.1 (mother) is entitled for 1/3rd share and allowed the petition in part. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being the class I legal heirs are entitled to the entire benefits and the trial Court erred in granting 2/3rd share to the petitioners and 1/3rd share to respondent No.1 (mother). It is contended that the order is contrary to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 submits that Babu Gowda was the father of Lolaksha and husband of Anusuya (respondent No.1). Babu Gowda pre- deceased on 04.03.2012 and Lolaksha died on 11.05.2015. Lolaksha had nominated Babu Gowda as nominee to the insurance policies, pursuant to the death of Babu Gowda, the deceased had not nominated anyone. His wife and children and the mother come under the class-I legal heirs and are entitled for the benefits of the insurance policies. He submits that the trial Court has considered all the aspects and rightly apportioned shares recognising all class I legal heirs and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court. Learned counsel also submits that during the pendency of this Appeal, appellant No.1 has re-married on 04.05.2022. 9. This Court has carefully considered the submission and perused the material on record. The point that arises for consideration is, 'whether the trial Court was justified in issuing the succession certificate to the extent of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 their share as indicated in the impugned order and whether the same warrants any interference by this Court'? 10. The genealogy of the parties is culled out as under: Babu Gowda (Died on 04.03.2012) Anusuya (Wife-R1) Lolaksha Janardhan (Son) (Son-R2) (Died on 11.05.2015) Suchithra (Wife 3 petitioner No.1) Manisha (Daughter 3 petitioner No.2) 11. It is undisputed that the deceased died intestate. The father (nominee) predeceased the deceased. The surviving class I heirs are wife, daughter and mother. Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 reads as under: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 "8. General rules of succession in the case of males. 5The property of a male Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the provisions of this Chapter:5 (a) firstly, upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class I of the Schedule; (b) secondly, if there is no heir of class I, then upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class II of the Schedule; (c) thirdly, if there is no heir of any of the two classes, then upon the agnates of the deceased; and (d) lastly, if there is no agnate, then upon the cognates of the deceased." 12. Under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, the property devolved upon the class I heirs equally. The trial Court after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence held that the petitioners together are entitled to 2/3rd share and respondent No.1-mother is entitled to 1/3rd share. The manner in which the trial Court has considered the entire evidence and material on record, this - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15612 MFA No. 1913 of 2020 Court is of the considered view that the same does not warrant any interference by this Court and accordingly, the point framed for consideration is answered and this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The Miscellaneous First Appeal is hereby dismissed. ii. The order passed by the trial Court in P & SC.No.06/2017 is hereby confirmed. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35