Section 269: When and how District Judge to interfere for protection of property

Indian Succession Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1925

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 269

Section 269 regulates when and how the District Judge may interfere for the protection of property of a deceased person within his district.

  • Interim Preservation Authority: The District Judge may, immediately upon the death of a person leaving property within his district, take measures for the security, sealing, and safe custody of the property.
  • Exclusion of Corporate and Exemption Tiers: Applies primarily where the deceased was not a Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, or Jaina, preserving the property until formal administration is claimed.
  • Notice to Known Relatives: The Judge must immediately give notice of the protective custody to the known relatives or executors of the deceased.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • State of Bihar v. Radha Krishna Singh (1983) 3 SCC 118: The Supreme Court recognized that Section 269 provides an immediate statutory police power to the District Judge to lock and seal premises containing unrepresented assets.
  • Clarence Pais v. Union of India (2001) 4 SCC 325: Affirmed that protective intervention under Section 269 prevents theft and conversion of personal estates.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

Where an expatriate or lonely elderly person dies leaving expensive real estate or bank lockers unattended, counsel for distant relatives should move an urgent application under Section 269 for the District Judge to seal the house and inventory contents through a court bailiff.