The short facts are the appellants are the defendants in suit No.
Since the deceased Thankappan Pillai had numberother legal heir to succeed his estates, he is entitled to be declared as a legal heir to the estates of the said deceased.
2000 3 SCR 752 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA, J. This appeal is directed against the High Court order dated 26th September, 1989 in second appeal.
Both, the suits and the said proceeding under the Indian Succession Act were tried together and decided by a companynmon judgment by the trial companyrt.
The High Court in second appeal set aside this appellate companyrt judgment as findings were number supported by pleadings in the case hence remanded the case back for reconsideration.
Defendants appellants companytested the said case.
Thereafter the appellant filed the second appeal.
They pleaded that plain tiff was only their uterine brother and thus was number entitled to succeed as legal heir.
The suit was for declaration, partition and recovery of possession of the plaint schedule properties.
Submission for the respondent plaintiff before the High Court was that since appeal was number preferred against the order of the appellate companyrt arising out of the proceeding for the grant of the Succession Certificate, it became final, thus it operates as res judicata.
The plaintiff being the real brother of the deceased Thankappan Pillai is entitled to inherit his property.
The said respondent also filed O.P. No.
33 of 74 by granting the Succession Certificate to the plaintiff.
l Velu Pillai since deceased claiming to be the only legal heir as brother to the estates of one Kizhangumvilayil died intestate.
The short question raised in this appeal is, whether an order granting Succession Certificate under Section 373 of the Indian Succession Act 1925 would operate as res judicata to the suit for partition filed in a civil companyrt between the same parties.
Thus the trial companyrt decreed the suit declaring the plaintiff as a sole heir and also allowed the said application O.P. No.
33 of 1974 in the same companyrt for obtaining Succession Certificate for receiving money from Life Insurance Corporation.
20 of 1974 which is filed by respondent No.
In fact, they are in possession of the suit property which companyld number be disturbed except by any legal heir.
The plain tiff case in the suit is that he along with Ramakrishna Pillai and the said deceased Thankappan Pillai were the children of one Parameshwaran Pillai and Karthiyayani Amma.
After remand, the appellate companyrt dismissed the appeal of the appellant by companyfirming the trial companyrt judgment.
