BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS. versus BALKRISHAN D. SANGHVI & ORS.

Citation: [2008] 14 S.C.R. 525 · Decided: 16-10-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 14 S.C.R. 525 
-~ 
BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS. 
A 
v. 
BALKRISHAN D. SANGHVI & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6124 of 2008) 
OCTOBER 16, 2008 
B 
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND MARKANDEY KAT JU, JJ.] 
~ 
Administration suit - Suit filed by Respondent No. 1 for 
administration of the Estate of his deceased parents, who died 
intestate - Deceased parents of Respondent No. 1, during their 
lifetime, had entered into transactions with Appellants - High c 
Court allowed amendment to the plaint and thereby impleaded 
Appellants as parties to the suit - Challenge to - Held: The 
Court while appointing an Administrator in an administration 
suit to administer the Estate of the deceased, who dies intes-
D 
tate, may be required to examine transactions involving prop-
~ 
erties of the Estate to determine assets of the Estate as on 
' 
date of death of the owner thereof -
Consequently, 
/ 
impleadment of persons who may be involved in some trans-
action or the other concerning the Estate of the deceased, may 
~ 
become necessary for a decision in an administration suit -
E 
High Court did not commit any error in allowing amendments 
to the plaint which had the effect of impleading Appellants as 
parties to the administration suit filed by Respondent No. 1 
and permitting Respondent No. 1 to question transactions 
entered into by owners of the Estate with third parties - Code 
F 
-1· 
of Civil Procedure, 1908 - 0. VI, &. 17. 
\ 
The question which arose for consideration in the 
present appeal is whether in a suit filed by Respondent 
No.1 for administration of the Estate of his deceased par-
G 
ents, who died intestate, transactions entered into and 
concluded by them during their lifetime with Appellants 
4 
-J.. 
could not be called into question and the High Court erred 
in allowing amendment to the plaint and thereby implead-
ing the Appellants as parties to the said administration suit. 
525 
H 
J 
526 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 
A 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
t--- ~ 
HELD:1.1. One is unable to accept objections to the 
impleadment of Appellants as necessary parties in the ad-
ministration suit filed by Respondent No.1, particularly 
B 
when both his parents had died intestate. [Para 10] [530F] 
1.2. In an administration suit, the Court, while con-
sidering the grant of authority to an individual having an 
~ 
interest in the Estate of the deceased to administer the 
Estate, has also to determine the extent of the estate of 
c the deceased at the time of his death to facilitate the dis-
tribution of the estate to all the heirs of the deceased. 
During such enquiry the Court is not called upon to de-
termine the right and title of the parties in the properties 
of the Estate, but to ascertain the extent of the properties 
D of the Estate. However in administration suits in respect 
of a person who dies intestate, the position is different. 
The Court while appointing an Administrator in an admin-
istration suitto administer the Estate of the deceased, who 
,.. -
dies intestate, may be required to examine transactions 
E involving the properties of the Estate in order to deter-
mine the assets of the Estate as on the date of death of 
' 
the owner thereof. Consequently, the impleadment of per-
sons who may be involved in some transaction or the 
other concerning the Estate of the deceased, may become 
necessary for a decision in an administration suit. [Para 
F 
11) [530-G-H, 531-A-C] 
1.3. The High Court has correctly indicated that in an 
\-. -
administration suit, the dispute between the parties relat-
'f
,. 
ing to the title of the deceased in respect of his proper-
.;__ 
G ties, can be gone into in an administration suit and that 
...... 
there is no bar to a Court determining the validity of trans-
I 
ac~ions allegedly entered into by or on behalf of the de-
ceased, whose Estate is to be administered. In Appendix 
\ ,_ 
"D" to the Code of Civil Procedure which deals with the 
H forms of decrees in different suits, Form 17 indicates the 
y 
--f 
BABULAL KHANDELWAL & ORS. v. BALKRISHAN 
527 
D. SANGHVI & ORS. 
form in which preliminary decrees in Administration Suits A 
are to be passed. Paragraph 3 of the Form deals with suits 
filed by the next of kin of the deceased who dies intes-
tate, as in the instant case, and provides for an inquiry to 
be made and account taken of what or of what share, if 
any, the plaintiff is entitled to as next-of-kin in the move-
8 
able properties of the Estate. However, if the move

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.