Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

Pillay v Pillay [2010] FJHC 611; HBC369.1998 (20 September 2010)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LAUTOKA
CIVIL JURISDICTION

Civil Action No HBC 369 of 1998

BETWEEN:

SUNDRAMMA PILLAY father's name Periamma Mudaliar of Sabeto, Lautoka, Domestic duties, DHARMENDRA PILLAY, SOM SUNDARAM PILLAY father's name Rangaswamy of Sanasana, Nadi, SAVITRI PILLAY of Watisi, Ba and nagmani pillay of Sydney Australia
Plaintiff

AND:

DAMODRAN PILLAY
father's name Rangaswamy of Sanasana, Bailiff as the sole Administrator in the Estate of Rangaswamy aka Rangaswamy Pillay father's name Munsami Late of Sabeto, Lautoka.
First Defendant

AND:

FIJI SUGAR CORPORATION Lautoka
Second Defendant

ORDER OF THE COURT

When this matter was first mentioned before me seeking a hearing date on 11/12/2009, I referred the matter back to the Master to attend to pending steps prior to fixing for Hearing.

The Master by his order of 22/1/2010 fixed this matter for Hearing before me for the 6/5/2010 and ordered the parties to attend Mediation before him pending the trial on the 30/4/2010. The EX-PARTE NOTICE OF MOTION to substitute the deceased 1st named Plaintiff issued on 3rd or 8th of October 2009 appears to have been dealt with by the Master on 30/10/2009 though the caption has not been amended.

Though this matter was fixed for hearing before me for the 6/5/2010, it was taken out of the trial roll on the parties seeking more time for settlement and for reasons above and as set out in my order of same date, where I have made my observation that this matter appears to be a matter that ought to have been filed in the Principal Probate Registry in Suva High Court, and for parties to make submissions in respect of same.
Thereafter this matter came up again on 18/5/2010 and parties sought time to settle this matter and sought time till 7/June/2010. On 7/June/2010 parties again sought further time till 7/7/2010. On the 7/7/2010 parties sought further time again finally till 14/7/2010 to settle this matter. On the 14/7/2010 parties jointly moved that this matter be transferred to Suva High Court and Principal Probate Registry.

Due to such proceedings this court reserved order on notice on the 14/7/2010. As this court has been having hearing matters almost every day, and pending matters requiring priority, I consider this matter for order now.

At paragraph 6 of the Originating Summons of 18/12/1998 the Plaintiffs seek an order that the 1st named Plaintiff be appointed as the sole Administratrix of the Estate of Rangaswami in place of Damoddran Pillay. It is of interest to note that Damoddran Pillay has been appointed Sole Administrator of the Estate of Rangaswami in case No. 20 of 1993 filed in this High Court at Lautoka. Subsequently by Practice Direction No.2 of 1994 the then Chief Justice directed that, such matters thereafter should be dealt with in the Principal Probate Registry in Suva and by the Suva High Court.

The present action No. HBC0369/98L has been instituted, after Practice Direction 2 of 1994, for the removal and appointment of the Administrator, and as such, for the reason more fully set out in my Judgment of 26/4/2010 in 144 of 2007, this action ought to have been filed in the Principal Probate Registry in the Suva High Court in keeping with the said Practice Direction No.2 of 1994.

As the parties are jointly moving as well, for the transfer of this matter to the Principal Probate Registry in Suva and Suva High Court, I hereby transfer this action HBC 0369/98L to the Principal Probate Registry and Suva High Court subject to the following further orders.

It is hereby also ordered that case No.20 of 1993 at the High Court of Lautoka, if still available at the Registry Lautoka, too be transferred to the Probate Registry in Suva High Court and both these cases being Nos. HBC 0369/98L and the earlier case No. 20 of 1993 (if available) should be transferred to the Principal Probate Registry in the High Court at Suva for amalgamation to secure testamentary integrity.

The Principal Probate Registry and the Chief Registrar of the High Court may submit this matter before a Judge for further steps including;

(1) To amend the caption to include the Substitution of the deceased 1st Plaintiff; made by Ex parte Notice of Motion of 30/October/2009 in this action no; HBC 0369 f 1998, thereafter,

(2) To amalgamate case no. 20 of 1993 (High Court Lautoka) with this action no. HBC 0369 of 1998,

(3) To order the Defendant sole Administrator to lodge the letters of Administration under Order 76 Rule 4 or such similar orders.

(4) Notice parties.

Sgd
Y I Fernando
Judge
At Lautoka
20th. September 2010.