High Court · 2025

11.Sandhya, D/o. Smt. Krishna'Bai (Late), Aged. 50 Years, Occ. House Hold' R/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

12.Pradeep, S/o. Smt. Krishna Bai (Late), Aged. 48 years, Occ. Bank Service, R/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

13.Vishnu Kumar, S/o. Srirt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged.56 Years, Occ. Business, 14. Usha, Olo. Smt. Kahala Bai (Late), Aged. 54 years, Business, R/o. Rl/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State. Kutbiguda, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

15.Shivkumar, S/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (late), Aged. 52 years, Occ. Pvt. Service, R"/o. Ramkote, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

16.Ghanshyam, 5/6. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 50 Years, Occ. Bank Service, Rl/o. Ramkote, Hyderabad, Telangana State. 'l7.Sangitha, D/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 48 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Koti Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State. ...PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/PROPOSED PLAINTIFFS AND '1 . Smt. Karuna Bai and 2 Others, Wo. Late Mukund Lal, Aged 67 Years, Occ. House-hold, Rio. C/o. Ashok Kumar jaju, A-13, Dilshad Plaza, Kandaswamy Lane, OPP. Hanuman Vyaamasala, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT NO.1/RESPONDENT NO.1/PLAINTIFF

2. The Branch Manager, Central Bank of lndia, Koti Blanch, Hyderabad. 3. All Concerned, (No notice is necessary to Respondent No. 13 Since she is formal Party to this Revision) ...RESPONDENTS 2&3/RESPONDENT Nos.2&3/DEFENDANTS lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Order Vll Rule 14 of C.P.C R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive the enlisted documents 2 to 21 as shown in the index to this application in the above CRP.No.97 of 2022 in the interest of justice to complete adjudication of the above LIS by this Hon'ble Court pending disposal of the above Revision in this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice. lA NO: 2 OF 2022 Between The Branch Manager, Koti Branch, Central Bank of lndia, Koti, Hyderabad, Telangana State. ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.2/RESPONDENT NO.2 AND Bailgau, Karnataka State. Banhati, Karnataka State. Business, Bijapur, Karnataka.

1. Shanta Wo Subashji, D/o. Late Mr. Bhawari bai, Aged. 60 years, Occ. Household, R/o. C/o. Subash Chandji Soni, Chatigalli,- Opp. Canara Bank, Sholapur, Maharastra. 2. Brijlal, S/o Subashji, D/o. alte Mrs. Bhawari bai, Aged. 50 Years, Occ. pvt. 3. Shaila, D/o. Late Mrs. Bhawari Bai, Aged.S3 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. 4. Gayatri, D/o. Late Mrs. Bhawari Bai, Aged. 51 Years, Occ. House Hold, R/o. 5 V.ry.a, D/o. Late Mrs. Bhawari Bai, Aged. 49 Years, Occ. Household, R/o. 6. Sarita (Baby), D/o. Late Mrs. Bhawari Bai, Aged.47 years, Occ. House Hold, 7. lndira, D/o. Late Mrs. Bhawari Bai, Aged. 45 years, Occ House Hold, R/o. B. Rani, D/o. Late Mrs BhaMari Bai, Aged.43 years, Occ. House hold, R/o. 9. Narayan Ctrandak.(Dilip), S19. Smt Krishna Bai (Late), Aged.53 years, Occ. - F-usirless, R/o. Badichowdi, Hyderabad, Telangani Staie. - l0.Muralidahr_(lrlfnol), S/o. Smt. Krishna Bai -(Late), Aged 53 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Badichowdi, Hyderabad, Telangana Statd Mangalveda, Maharashtra. R/o. Jalgaun, Maharashtra. jalgaun, Maaharashtra. Sholapur, Maharashtra.

11.Sandhya, D/o. Smt, Krishna Bai (Late), Aged. 50 Years, Occ. House Hold, R/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Tblangana State.

12.Pradeep, S/o. Smt. Krishna Bai (Late), Aged. 48 years, Occ. Bank Service, R/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

13.Vishnu Kumar, S/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 56 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

14. Usha, D/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 54 years, Business, R/o. Kutbiguda, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

15.Shivkumar, S/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (late), Aged. 52 years, Occ. Pvt. Service, R/o. Ramkote, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

16. Ghanshyam, S/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 50 Years, Occ. Bank Service, R7o. Ramkote, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

17.Sangitha, D/o. Smt. Kamala Bai (Late), Aged. 48 years, Occ. Business, R/o. KotiSultanBazar'Hvderab::iJ8FSt-ts8-iSticErroNERS/pErroNERS/

18.Smt. Karuna Bai and 2 Others, Wo. Late Mukund Lal, Aged 67 Years, Occ. House-hold, R/o. C/o. Ashok Kumar jaju, A-'13, Dilshad Plaza, Kandaswamy Lane, OPP. Hanuman Vyaamasala, Hyderabad.

19.All concerned. ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.1/RESPONDENT NO.1. Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim stay granted by this Court by order daled 21-01-2022 in l.A. No. 1oI 2022 in C.R.P. No.97 of 2022. lA NO: 't OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS.No. 10 of 2019 on the flle of the court of the XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, Hyderabad District pending disposal of the above Revision in this Honourable Court in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRl. RAMA MURTY P V S A Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI METTU VIKRANTH REDDY REP.SRI METTU SRINIVAS REDDY The Court made the following: OROER THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI I.A. No.l of 2024 In/and CIVII. REVISION PETITION No.97 of 2022 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners-proposed plaintiffs, aggrieved by the order dated 30.1 1.2021 in l.A. No.3l7 of 2019 in O.S No.l0 of 2019 passed by the XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad

2. The respondent No.l-plaintiff filed O.S. No.10 of 2019 to declare her as legal heir of deceased Motilal Jawar, along with her other deceased sisters Smt. Banwari Bai, Krishna Bai and Kamala Bai and for delivery of contents placed in safe locker No.542-B of the respondent No.2 bank i.e. Central Bank oflndia, Koti Branch, Hyderabad.

3. The respondent No.2 bank frled written slatement contesting the matter. They contended that no document was placed by the plaintiff to show that Smt. Bhanwari Bai, Krishna Bai and Kamala Bai died and that she had not disclosed the family members of the alleged deceased sisters and not made them as parties to the suit, the suit was liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. The respondent No.l-plaintiff filed a z D..GRR,l CRP No.97 of 2022 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed by all the children of her sisters granting permission to the respondent No.l-plaintiff to appear before the concemed authorities to sign all the documents that were necessary to get the locker released by way of submission of necessary representations and also enclosed the succession certificate issued by the Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in OP No.496 of 1977, dated 01.10.1981. The respondent No.2 bank raised objection with regard to the said documents also stating that the MOU was an unregistered document and that the succession certificate filed before the court was a photocopy and that they were not admissible in evidence.

4. Subsequently, the revision petitioner Nos.l to 17 herein filed an application vide I.A. No.317 of 2019 before the XX Additional Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, to implead themselves as plaintiff Nos.2 to 18 in O.S. No.l0 of 2019 under Order I Rule 10 read with 151 of CPC. The respondent No.2 Bank filed counter in the said application opposing that the affidavit filed by the petitioner No.9 in the said application cannot be considered as valid as no authorization letter or GPA was given to him to represent all the other applicants and that he had no locus standi to represent them and no documents were filed by the a D..GRR, t CRI No.97 oJ2022 ,// proposed plaintiffs to show that they were the legal heirs of the deceased Motilal Jawar.

5. The court below on considering the contentions raised by both the counsel before it, dismissed the petition observing that in a suit for declaration, all the legal heirs were necessary parties to the suit, but however, no documentary evidence was filed to show that they were the legal heirs of late Motilal Jawar. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the said application, the proposed plaintiffs preferred this civil revision petition.

6. During the pendency of the revision petition, the proposed plaintiffs f,rled t.A. No.l of 2024 to receive the documents to prove that they were the legal heirs of the three daughters of deceased Motilal Jawar besides respondent No.l and that they were also proper and necessary parties to the suit. '7. Heard Sri P.V.S.A. Rama Murthy, leamed counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mettu Vikranth Reddy, leamed counsel representing Sri Mettu Srinivas Reddy, leamed counsel for the respondent No.2 Bank.

8. Perused the record.

9. As seen from the record, the respondent No.I - plaintiff filed the suit for succession certificate under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, . r.,l*",*i""a*ilJ;*,i. .,. 4 D|.GRR, J CRP No.97 012022 1925 to declare her as legal heir of deceased Motilal Jawar, along with her sisters Smt. Bhanwari Bai, Krishna Bai and Kamala Bai, daughters of deceased Motilal Jawar and to direct the respondent No.2 Bank to allow her for custody of the safe deposit locker account No.542-8 and to release the contents lying therein. She had not suppressed the fact that she was having three other sisters, but stated that all her three sisters died and the legal heirs of all her sisters entered into a MOU with her to approach the Bank authorities for release of the contents lying in the safe deposit locker account. Due to the objection raised by respondent No.2 bank authorities that the MOU was an unregistered document, all the other legal heirs of the three sisters, who were also the daughters of late Motilal Jawar, filed the implead application to implead them in the said suit. But, the said application was dismissed by the trial court as they failed to file the relevant documents to show that they were the legal heirs of Bhanwari Bai, Krishna Bai and Kamala Bai, alleged children of late Motilal Jawar along with respondent No. 1 -plaintiff.

10. The petitioners herein - proposed plaintiffs hled the relevant documents before this court vide I.A. No.l of 2024. The petitioner Nos.l to 8 stated that they were the legal heirs of the deceased Mrs. Bhanwari Bai and filed the family members certificate dated, 26.05.2015 issued by the I i :r..1 5 D/.GRR, J CRP No.97 oI2022 competent authority and their Aadhar cards in proof of their contention that they were the legal heirs of deceased Bhanwari Bai. The petitioner Nos.9 to 12 filed the certified copy of the Electoral Roll-2011, dated 02.05.2011 issued by the competent authority in favour of the petitioner Nos.9 to 12 wherein their father's name was shown as Balkishan, as shown in the succession certificate dated 01.10.1981 in OP No.496 of 1977 wherein the name of the husband of Smt. Krishna Bai was shown as Balkishan. Thev filed their Aadhar Cards in proof of their identity and to show that they were the children of Smt. Krishna Bai and Balkishan. The petitioner Nos. 13 to 17 had trled the copy of the Will dated 22-02-2008 executed by Smt. Kamala Bai @ Kamala Devi Baldawa wherein her husband's name was shown as Satyanarayan Baldawa, as shown in the succession certificate dated 01.10.1981 and executed the Will in favour of petitioner Nos.13 to

17. They also filed Aadhar Cards to prove that they were the legal heirs of the deceased Kamala Devi.

11. As the above documents are necessary to prove their relationship as children of late Bhanwari Bai, Krishna Bai and Kamala Bai, who were the daughters of late Motilal Jawar and no prejudice would be caused to the respondent No.2 Bank in allowing I.A. No.l of 2024, it is considered fit to I I allow the said application fited by the petitioners herein. 6 DtGRR,I CRP No.97 of 2022

12. In the impugned order, the leamed XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad rightly held that in a suit for declaration, all the legal heirs of the parties were necessary parties.to the suit, but as they failed to file any documentary evidence to prove the said fact, dismissed the said petition. The petitioners had now filed the necessary documents to prove their relationship as the children of late Bhanwari Bai, late Krishna Bai and late Kamala Bai, the daughters of deceased Motilal Jawar along with respondent No.1-plaintiff. Hence, it is considered fit to allow the revision petition by setting aside the order of the trial court.

15. In the result, the Civil Revision petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 30.11.2021 in I.A. No.3 17 of 2019 in O.S No.l0 of 2019 passed by the XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. I.A. No.1 of 2024 is also allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any, shall stand closed. l //TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR secrlo{brrlcea To,'t. The XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad 2 One CC to Sri Rama Murthy P.V.S.A , Advocate (OPUC) 3. One CC to Sri Mettu Srinivds Reddy, Advocate (OPUC) 4. Two CD Copies Ks/psl ,7 { , : .-r - {l^ .a- ,: . .,;'- j: I {) 20 l{ri M t OESPAl13tr o .': ), -bt .* HIGH COURT DATED:0210412025 ORDER l.A.No.1 of 2024 ln/and C.R.P.No.97 of 2022 / / Allowing the l.A. and llowing the C.R.P.without costs.