Daughter’s Plea To Restore Power At Husband’s Shop Fails As Gauhati HC Says Hindu Probate Court Cannot Use CPC Section 151 For Interim Protection

In brief

The question

Whether the Probate Court could order restoration of the shop’s electricity supply under Section 151 CPC in a proceeding to determine the genuineness of a will.

The court held

The High Court dismissed the revision petition, finding no ground to interfere with the Probate Court’s order.

It also directed

The parties were left to bear their own costs.

01Facts

The respondents brought Probate Title Suit No. 13/2024 seeking probate of their late mother’s 2006 will over land on which Shop No. 2, operated as M/s. Akash Electricals by the petitioner’s husband, is situated.

¶ 3–5

The petitioner, a defendant in the probate suit, applied under Section 151 CPC for restoration of electricity allegedly disconnected by the respondents during the proceeding. The Probate Court rejected the application, holding that the electricity dispute fell outside its jurisdiction; the petitioner challenged that order under Article 227 of the Constitution.

¶ 2, 5–7, 12

02Issues

i.Whether the Probate Court could order restoration of the shop’s electricity supply under Section 151 CPC in a proceeding to determine the genuineness of a will.

¶ 6–7, 12–16

ii.Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 with the Probate Court’s refusal to grant that relief.

¶ 13, 17–18

03Law Applied

Section 269(1) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 empowers a District Judge to protect property pending probate, but Section 269(2) excludes that power where the deceased was, among others, a Hindu.

¶ 14–15

The Court held that this express exclusion cannot be circumvented by invoking the inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to obtain interim protection in the probate proceeding.

¶ 15

The Court also applied the principle that Article 227 is supervisory, not appellate, jurisdiction and should not be exercised routinely to interfere with subordinate-court orders.

¶ 17

Although the petitioner relied on Section 295 of the Succession Act and authorities concerning probate proceedings, the Court did not find those submissions sufficient to justify the requested relief.

¶ 6–8, 11, 13–15

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 295 Section 269

04Reasoning

The testator was Hindu, so Section 269(2)’s exclusion applied and the Probate Court could not use Section 151 CPC to grant the requested interim protection.

¶ 15

In addition, the electricity-billing dispute was collateral to the probate court’s task of deciding the will’s genuineness and could be pursued in an independent civil suit.

¶ 12, 16

The petitioner’s entitlement to seek relief was also uncertain because the shop was said to be owned by her husband, who had not approached the Court.

¶ 12, 16

In these circumstances, no basis existed for supervisory interference under Article 227.

¶ 17–18