Allahabad High Court
Hafiz Naushad Ahmad And Another vs Union Of India And 2 Others on 16 March, 2021
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Ravi Nath Tilhari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD A.F.R. Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4585 of 2021 Petitioner :- Hafiz Naushad Ahmad And Another Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Ali Ausaf,Sr. Advocate Shri V.K. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I.,Manu Vardhana Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.
1. Heard Sri V.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Mohd. Ali Ausaf, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for the State - respondents and Sri Manu Vardhana, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief : -
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 to immediately ensure the payment of amount of compensation of Rs. 60,60,606/- (SR. 3,00,000) alongwith interest thereon as awarded in favour of the petitioners by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia due to accidental death of his son (Late Mohd. Faize) through cheque No.291792 dated 9.8.2020 in favour of District Magistrate, Mau vide letter dated 11.08.2020 through Embassy of India Riyadh;
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to take immediate decision for ensuring/releasing of amount of compensation of Rs. 60,60,606/- (SR. 3,00000/) awarded in favour of the petitioners by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia due to accidental death of his son (Late Mohd. Faize) through cheque No.291792 dated 9.8.2020 in favour of District Magistrate, Mau vide letter dated 11.08.2020 through Embassy of India Riyadh as requested by the petitioners through applications dated 7.10.2020 and 28.12.2020.
Facts :
3. The petitioners are the parents of their unmarried son late Mohd. Faize who died in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 24.08.2019 in a road accident. Salary of the deceased son of the petitioners was remitted by the Embassy of India, Riyadh to the District Magistrate, Mau (India) by a Cheque No.291167 dated 10.09.2019 Rs.26,577/- of State Bank of India. To get payment of the aforesaid salary amount, the petitioner herein obtained a succession certificate dated 03.03.2020 from the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mohammadabad Gohna, Mau. Office of the District Magistrate, Mau also issued a Letter No.145 dated 14.10.2020 certifying that the family of the deceased consists of only the petitioners who are parents of the deceased.
4. Subsequently, the District Magistrate, Mau received a cheque No.291792 dated 09.08.2020 of State Bank of India for Rs.60,60,606/- for compensation in respect of death of the deceased, for making payment to the successors of the deceased. The petitioners being the only successors/ parents of the deceased, have been approaching continuously to the respondent No.3, i.e. the District Magistrate, Mau for release of the payment but the District Magistrate is not making the payment of the aforesaid compensation amount. As per instructions of the respondent No.3 dated 27.02.2021 received by the learned standing counsel, the District Magistrate is not making payment of compensation to the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have not produced a succession certificate in respect of the aforesaid amount of compensation. It has further been stated in the instructions that guidance has been sought from the State Government for making payment of compensation to the petitioner but guidance has not been received from the State Government.
5. The aforesaid compensation amount was sent by the Embassy of India, Riyadh to the District Magistrate, Mau vide letter dated 11.08.2020, which is reproduced below:
"EMBASSY OF INDIA RIVADH REGISTERED POST No.RIY/CW/436/805/2019 Dated:11.08.2020 District Magistrate Mau District Uttar Pradesh, India.
Sub: Payment of legal dues in respect of Late Shri. Mohd Faize Dear Sir, Enclosed please find a State Bank of India Cheque No. 291792 dated 09.08.2020 for Rs.60,60,606 (Rupees Sixty Lakh Sixty Thousand Six hundred Six only) equivalent to SR.3,00000/- pertaining to legal dues and end of service in respect of (late) Shri. Mohd Faize, who died in Saudi Arabia
2. The address of the legal heirs of the deceased, according to our records, is as under.
Shri Hafiz Naushad Ahmad, Flo (Late) Shri. Mohd Faize R/o, Vill Nagripar, Post Bandikala, Teh Mohammadabad Gohna, Mau.Dist, Uttar Pradesh, India
3. We shall be grateful if the above amount is disbursed to all the legal heirs after due inquiry/verification and the receipt duly signed by the legal heirs may be returned to this Embassy at the earliest.
4. The cheque may kindly be deposited in the official account before its expiry as issue of fresh cheque in lieu is a long drawn procedures, which delay the payment to the legal heirs. Yours faithfully, (Rajeev Ranjan) ASO (CW) Copy to:
1.Shri Hafiz Naushad Ahmad, F/o (Late) Shri. Mohd Faize, R/o, Vill Nagripar, Post Bandikala, Teh Mohammadabad Gohna, Mau Dist, Uttar Pradesh, India. You are requested to approach the district authority for collecting the amount.
2. Ministry of External Affairs, Consular Section, New Delhi
3. The Secretary, (Home Department), Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.
4. Passport Office, Lucknow for making entry regarding cancellation of Passport No.M4260343 dated 09.12.2014 issued to Shri. Mohd Faze.
(Rajeev Ranjan) ASO (CW)"
6. The office of the District Magistrate has issued a letter/ certificate no.145 dated 14.10.2020 certifying the successors of the deceased. The aforesaid letter/ certificate dated 14.10.2020 is reproduced below:
"dk;kZy; ftykf/kdkjh&eÅA i=kad 1451@ izek.k i= fy0@eÅ@20 fnukad 14&10&2020 ikfjokfjd fooj.k i= ¼;g izek.k i= ojklr ds eqdnek] vk;dj ds fy, iz;qDr ugha gksxk½ rglhynkj eq0ckn dh vk[;k fnukad 12-10-2020 ds vk/kkj ij izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS Jh eks- QSth iq=@iq=h@iRuh gkfQt ukS'kkn vgen xzke uxjhikj rglhy- eq0ckn tuin eÅ dh e`R;q fnukad 24-8-2019 dks gks pqdh gSA rglhynkj eq0ckn dh vk[;k fnukad 12-10-2020 ds vk/kkj ij mDr ds ikfjokfjd lnL; fuEufyf[kr gS%& Sdzekad Ikfjokfjd lnL;
e`rd ds lEcU/k vk;q vU; fooj.k 1- 2 3 4
1- gkfQt ukS'kkn vgen firk 56 Ok"kZ 2- 'kkghu ckuks ekrk 56 o"kZ mijksDr dzekad 1 yxk;r 2 ds vykok e`rd ds vU; okfjl ugh gSA
uksV%& ;g izek.k i= dsoy iz'kklfud tkap ij vk/kkfjr gSA U;k;ky; esa py jgs ojklr ds eqdnek ds fy, ;g ykxw ugha gksxkA iznf'kZr fofHkUu dkuwuksa vkSj vf/kfu;eksa ftlesa dh ;g vis{kk gS fd fookfnr ns;dksa Hkqxrku dks izkIr djus ds fy, tuin U;k;k/kh'k }kjk fuxZr mRrjkf/kdkj izek.k i= gh ekU; gksxkA mu ekeyksa esa ;g izek.k i= dsoy ikap gtkj ls de dh /kujkf'k ij gh ekU; gksxkA ;g izek.k i= fons'k Hkstus ds fy, ekU; ugha gSA izHkkjh vf/kdkjh izek.k i= d`rs ftykf/kdkjh eÅA"
7. From the letter of the Embassy dated 11.08.2020, it appears that a clear direction has been issued to the District Magistrate to pay the amount of aforesaid compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased as mentioned in the records of the Embassy, after due inquiry/verification. It appears that due inquiry/ verification has been made, which fact is evident from the letter/ certificate dated 14.10.2020 issued by the office of the District Magistrate, Mau, which has been reproduced above.
8. Aggrieved with the arbitrary action of the respondent no.3 in not disbursing the amount, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition praying for the relief as quoted above.
Discussion and Findings
9. It is undisputed that the petitioners are parents of the deceased. There is no successor other than them as is also evident from the letter/certificate of the office of the District Magistrate, Mau, dated 14.10.2020, which was issued after due inquiry. As to whether the law required a person to obtain succession certificate to receive an amount of compensation is the basic question involved in the present writ petition. Yesterday, this case was heard at length and with the consent of learned counsels for the parties, following questions were framed :
(i) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case particularly in view of the afore-quoted letter of the Embassy dated 11.08.2020 and the letter/ certificate of the office of the respondent No.3 dated 14.10.2020, any succession certificate is required for disbursing the amount of compensation to the petitioners?
(ii) If the answer to the aforesaid question is in affirmative, then under what provision of law, a succession certificate is required under the facts and circumstances of the case?
10. The insistence of learned standing counsel is that under Sections 370 and 374 of the Indian Succession Act, a Succession certificate is required to be obtained to enable the petitioners to get the amount of compensation awarded in respect of the death of their son. We do not find any substance in the submission.
11. Sections 370, 371, 372, 373 and 374 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 are relevant for the purposes of the present case and, therefore, these Sections are reproduced below :-
370. Restriction on grant of certificates under this part.--(1) A succession certificate (hereinafter in this Part referred to as a certificate) shall not be granted under this Part with respect to any debt or security to which a right is required by section 212 or section 213 to be established by letters of administration or probate:
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to prevent the grant of a certificate to any person claiming to be entitled to the effects of a deceased Indian Christian, or to any part thereof, with respect to any debt or security, by reason that a right thereto can be established by letters of administration under this Act.
(2) For the purposes of this Part, "security" means--
(a) any promissory note, debenture, stock or other security of the Central Government or of a State Government;
(b) any bond, debenture, or annuity charged by Act of Parliament [of the United Kingdom] on the revenues of India;
(c) any stock or debenture of, or share in, a company or other incorporated institution;
(d) any debenture or other security for money issued by, or on behalf of, a local authority;
(e) any other security which the [State Government] may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be a security for the purposes of this Part.
371. Court having jurisdiction to grant certificate.--The District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death, or, if at that time he had no fixed place of residence, the District Judge, within whose jurisdiction any part of the property of the deceased may be found, may grant a certificate under this Part.
372. Application for certificate.--(1) Application for such a certificate shall be made to the District Judge by a petition signed and verified by or on behalf of the applicant in the manner prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) for the signing and verification of a plaint by or on behalf of a plaintiff, and setting forth the following particulars, namely:--
(a) the time of the death of the deceased;
(b) the ordinary residence of the deceased at the time of his death and, if such residence was not within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Judge to whom the application is made, then the property of the deceased within those limits;
(c) the family or other near relatives of the deceased and their respective residences;
(d) the right in which the petitioner claims;
(e) the absence of any impediment under section 370 or under any other provision of this Act or any other enactment, to the grant of the certificate or to the validity thereof if it were granted; and
(f) the debts and securities in respect of which the certificate is applied for.
(2) If the petition contains any averment which the person verifying it knows or believes to be false, or does not believe to be true, that person shall be deemed to have committed an offence under section 198 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860). (3) Application for such a certificate may be made in respect of any debt or debts due to the deceased creditor or in respect of portions thereof.
373. Procedure on application.--(1) If the District Judge is satisfied that there is ground for entertaining the application, he shall fix a day for the hearing thereof and cause notice of the application and of the day fixed for the hearing--
(a) to be served on any person to whom, in the opinion of the Judge, special notice of the application should be given, and
(b) to be posted on some conspicuous part of the court-house and published in such other manner, if any, as the Judge, subject to any rules made by the High Court in this behalf, thinks fit, and upon the day fixed, or as soon thereafter as may be practicable, shall proceed to decide in a summary manner the right to the certificate. (2) When the Judge decides the right thereto to belong to the applicant, the Judge shall make an order for the grant of the certificate to him. (3) If the Judge cannot decide the right to the certificate without determining questions of law or fact which seem to be too intricate and difficult for determination in a summary proceeding, he may nevertheless grant a certificate to the applicant if he appears to be the person having prima facie the best title thereto. (4) When there are more applicants than one for a certificate, and it appears to the Judge that more than one of such applicants are interested in the estate of the deceased, the Judge may, in deciding to whom the certificate is to be granted, have regard to the extent of interest and the fitness in other respects of the applicants.
374. Contents of certificate.--When the District Judge grants a certificate, he shall therein specify the debts and securities set forth in the application for the certificate, and may thereby empower the person to whom the certificate is granted--
(a) to receive interest or dividends on, or
(b) to negotiate or transfer, or
(c) both to receive interest or dividends on, and to negotiate or transfer, the securities or any of them.
12. Bare reading of Sections 370 and 374 of the Act makes it clear that a Succession Certificate can be granted in respect of debts and Securities. The word "security" has been defined in Section 370(2) of the Act which does not include compensation. Therefore, in our considered view there is no requirement to obtain a succession certificate under the provisions of Part X (Sections 370 to 390) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 to receive compensation amount awarded on account of death of the son of the petitioners.
Disbursement of compensation where there is no dispute of legal representative
13. In the present set of facts there is no dispute that the petitioners are the legal representative of their deceased son being his parents. As a matter of fact the respondent no.3, after conducting some inquiry; has also issued a certificate No.145, dated 14.10.2020, as quoted above, wherein it has been certified that the petitioners are the only members of the deceased's family. Learned counsel for the petitioners have also produced before us a copy of the order dated 27.01.2020, passed by the Chief of the Public Court of Shaqra Province Second Public Circuit, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is kept on record. Perusal of the order shows that the petitioners being legal heirs of their deceased son Mohd. Faize, have filed the claim through their attorney which was adjudicated by the aforesaid court and an order of compensation of 300,000 Saudi Rials was passed to be divided between them being 200,000 Saudi Riyal to the petitioner no.1 and 100,000/- Saudi Riyal to the petitioner no.2. The aforesaid order also considered the certificate issued from the office of the District Magistrate, Mau, dated 17.10.2019. A copy of the aforesaid order dated 17.10.2019, has been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, which is kept on record and is reproduced below :-
"कार्यालय जिलाधिकारी -मऊ।
पत्रांक 1343/प्रमाण पत्र लि0/मऊ/19 दिनांक 17-10-2019 पारिवारिक विवरण पत्र (यह प्रमाण पत्र वरासत के मुकदमा, आयकर के लिए प्रयुक्त नहीं होगा) तहसीलदार मुहम्मदाबाद गोहना की आख्या दिनांक 15-10-2019 के आधार पर प्रमाणित किया जाता है श्री मु0 फौजी पुत्र नौशाद अमहद ग्राम नगरीपार तहसील मुहम्मदाबाद गोहना जनपद मऊ की मृत्यु दिनांक 24-8-2019 को हो चुकी है। तहसीलदार मुहम्मदाबाद गोहना की आख्या दिनांक 15-10-2019 के आधार पर उक्त के पारिवारिक सदस्य निम्नलिखित हैं- क्रमांक पारिवारिक सदस्य मृतक से सम्बन्ध आयु अन्य विवरण 1 2 3 4 (1) नौशाद अहमद पिता 57 वर्ष (2) शाहिना बानो माता 52 वर्ष उपरोक्त क्रमांक/लगायत 2 तक के अलावा मृतक का अन्य कोई वारिस नहीं है।
नोट- यह प्रमाण पत्र केवल प्रशासनिक जांच पर आधारित है। न्यायालय में चल रहे वरासत के मुकदमा के लिये यह लागू नहीं होगा। प्रदर्शित विभिन्न कानूनों और अधिनियमों जिसमें की यह अपेक्षा है कि विवादित देयकों भुगतान को प्राप्त करने के लिये जनपद न्यायाधीश द्वारा निर्गत उत्तराधिकार प्रमाण पत्र ही मान्य होगा। उन मामलों में यह प्रमाण पत्र केवल पांच हजार से कम की धनराशी पर ही मान्य होगा। यह प्रमाण पत्र विदेश भेजने के लिये मान्य नहीं है।
सील अपठनीय ह0 अपठनीय प्रभारी अधिकारी (प्रमाण पत्र) कृते जिलाधिकारी मऊ।"
14. Perusal of the aforesaid order dated 17.10.2019 shows that it was issued by the office of District Magistrate, Mau, after obtaining an inquiry report dated 15.10.2019, with regard to the family members and it was found that the petitioners being father and mother are the only family members of the deceased Mohd. Faize. Thus, it is undisputed that after due inquiry the respondent no.3 has found the petitioners to be the heirs and legal representatives of their deceased son Mohd. Faize and on that basis the order dated 27.01.2020 was passed by the Chief of the Public Court of Shaqra Province Second Public Circuit, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, granting compensation to the petitioners in the ratio as aforementioned. On receipt of the Cheque of compensation of Rs. 60,60,606/- the District Magistrate, Mau, again conducted some inquiry and issued an order dated 14.10.2020 after obtaining inquiry report dated 12.12.2020 and certified that the petitioners being father and mother of the deceased, are the only family members of the deceased. Thus, the respondent no.3 i.e. the District Magistrate, Mau, must have disbursed the amount to the petitioners but for the reasons best known to him he withheld the disbursement of the amount on one pretext or the other.
Whether for compensation of present nature a succession certificate is required
15. We have already held that compensation is neither a debt nor security and, therefore, the provisions of part X of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, shall not apply in matters of compensation. We are also fortified by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rukhsana (Smt) and Ors. Vs. Nazrunnisa (Smt) and Anr., 2000 (9) SCC 240, in which Hon'ble Supreme Court considered similar facts and held as under :-
"3. We cannot approve the said view of the High Court, for, Succession Certificate as envisaged in the Indian Succession Act can be granted only in respect of "debts" or "securities" to which a deceased was entitled. The amount involved in this case was not a debt or security to which the deceased was entitled. This was a compensation sanctioned on account of the death of the deceased and is, therefore, not an asset belonging to the deceased but an amount which the legal representatives of the deceased can claim on their own account. The civil court will only decide as to who are the legal representatives and in what shares they are entitled to as per the Personal Law applicable to them. The Parties will move appropriate application before the court concerned for expediting the procedure regarding disbursement of the amount. With these observations we set aside the impugned order."
16. For the reasons aforestated, we find that the District Magistrate, Mau, is bound to disburse the amount of compensation to the petitioners who are the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased Mohd. Faize. Therefore, we direct the respondent no.3 to disburse the amount of compensation forthwith. Petitioners are granted liberty to move an application before the respondent no.3 for payment of interest for the period the aforesaid amount of compensation has been illegally withheld by the respondent no.3. In the event such an application is filed by the petitioners within four months alongwith a copy of this order, the respondent no.3 shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within next three weeks and if any amount of interest is found to be due and payable, the same shall be paid by the respondent no.3 to the petitioners within next three weeks.
17. Writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
Order Date :- 16.03.2021/vkg