Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Lata Pandey vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 13 November, 2025

  IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIMESH BHASKAR MANI
                   TRIPATHI
            ACJ-CUM-ARC-CUM-CCJ,
 NORTH EAST DISTRICT: KARKARDOOMA COURTS,
                    DELHI

                      DLNE030002512025




SC No. 12/2025

1. Ms. Lata Pandey
W/o Sh. Ashok Pandey
R/o H. No. C-64, Gali no. 5,
Bhagat Singh Colony, New Usmanpur,
Seelampur, North-East, Delhi - 110053.                 .............Petitioner

                                 Versus
1. State of NCT of Delhi
Through SDM, (Seelampur)
North-East District
At: SDM Office Seelampur,
Seelampur Court, GT Road,
Seelampur, Delhi - 110053

2. Ms. Anuja
W/o Late Sh. Vivek Pandey
D/o Sh. Shiv Kumar Bajpai
R/o Kukar Gaon, Tehsil- Orai,
District- Jalaun, Uttar Pradesh - 285001

3. IDFC First Bank
Through its
Branch Manager / Authorised Officer
Office At: 62/20, New Rohtak Road,
Karol Bagh, Central Delhi, Delhi - 110005. ............Respondents
Date of institution of the petition        :         15.04.2025


   SC No. 12/2025    Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi      Page No. 1 of 7

                                                                           Digitally
                                                                           signed by
                                                                           ANIMESH
                                                                ANIMESH    BHASKAR
                                                                BHASKAR    MANI
                                                                           TRIPATHI
                                                                MANI
                                                                           Date:
                                                                TRIPATHI   2025.11.13
                                                                           16:05:31
                                                                           +0530
 Date on which judgment was reserved                        :     13.11.2025
Date of pronouncement of judgment                          :     13.11.2025
Decision                                                   :     Allowed

     PETITION FOR GRANT OF SUCCESSION
 CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 372 OF THE INDIAN
              SUCCESSION ACT.

                                JUDGMENT

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of succession certificate with respect to debts and securities of deceased Late Sh. Vivek Pandey, who had expired intestate on 26.01.2025. The State of NCT of Delhi, Ms. Anuja and IDFC First Bank are made respondents in this case.

2. The present petition has been filed with respect to gratuity amount, salary full and final settlement amount, group term life insurance policy and saving bank a/c no. 10069471636 in the name of deceased Late Sh. Vivek Pandey.

3. Service of notice of this petition was also effected upon general public through publication in newspapers i.e. 'The Statesman', dated 06.06.2025 and 'Rashtriya Sahara' dt. 06.06.2025. Till date, no objection for grant of certificate in favour of petitioner has been received from general public.

4. Accordingly, an enquiry was conducted and in the enquiry, verification report Ex. RW1/A (Colly. 13 pages) was filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 i.e. SDM, Seelampur, Delhi SC No. 12/2025 Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Page No. 2 of 7 Digitally signed by ANIMESH ANIMESH BHASKAR BHASKAR MANI TRIPATHI MANI Date:

TRIPATHI 2025.11.13 16:05:43 +0530 regarding the LRs of deceased Late Sh. Vivek Pandey. As per the report, deceased left following surviving legal heirs:
     i. Ms. Anuja                                Wife of deceased
     ii. Smt. Lata Pandey                        Mother of deceased
     iii. Sh. Ashok Kumar Pandey                 Father of deceased


5. Sh. Narender Kumar Tiwari, Legal Counsel, IDFC First Bank was examined as RW3. He brought the report from his branch gratuity amount of Rs. 11,529/-, salary full and final settlement amount of Rs. 7,699/-, group term life insurance policy amount of Rs. 30,00,000/-, saving bank a/c no.

10069471636 in the name of deceased Sh. Vivek Pandey an amount of Rs. 38,002/- as on 04.09.2025 are payable to deceased. Further, Employee Provident Fund of which applicable amount is to be disbursed by concerned EPFO Authority is also due, payable to the deceased. As per the said report an amount of Rs. 30,57,230/- alongwith the EPF Fund to be calculated by the concerned department at the time of disbursement, is payable to deceased. The said report to this effect alongwith documents are Ex. RW3/A(Colly. 18 pages). The bank has no objection if succession certificate in respect of aforesaid amount is granted in favour of petitioner. The bank reserve its right to verify that all the conditions for early death benefits are fulfilled and then the bank would release the amount as per succession certificate.

6. RW2 Ms. Anuja has given her statement regarding her objection if the succession certificate is issued in favour of SC No. 12/2025 Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Page No. 3 of 7 Digitally signed by ANIMESH ANIMESH BHASKAR BHASKAR MANI MANI TRIPATHI TRIPATHI Date:

2025.11.13 16:05:50 +0530 the petitioner. She stated that she is the wife of the deceased and whole of the share should accrue in her favour. In 2021, she got married to Vivek Pandey and her family members had fulfilled all demands of the petitioner and her husband. At present, she is not working anywhere and the petitioner alongwith her husband and thrown her out of her matrimonial home after 15 days of death of her husband and at present she is residing with her parents. Copy of her Aadhar card is Ex. RW2/A (OSR).

7. During her cross examination, she deposed that she got married with the deceased on 28.11.2021. She admitted that the petitioner is the mother of her deceased husband Vivek Pandey. She admitted that petitioner is a housewife and when she left her matrimonial home she was given something but she do not remember as what was given to her. She cannot remember whether she was given money, jeweleries, clothes and all other belongings including furnitures while going out. She admitted that she has not filed any police complaint against the petitioner or her husband till date. She admitted that she has not filed any document to show that Rs. 10 Lakhs were given to the petitioner and her husband during marriage. She denied that no such amount of Rs. 10 Lakhs was given to the petitioner or her husband at the time of marriage. She denied that she was not thrown out by her father-in-law or the petitioner just after 15 days of demise of her husband. She denied that she had left the matrimonial home on her own for the purpose of remarriage.




     SC No. 12/2025     Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi     Page No. 4 of 7
                                                                            Digitally signed
                                                                            by ANIMESH
                                                                ANIMESH BHASKAR
                                                                BHASKAR MANI
                                                                         TRIPATHI
                                                                MANI     Date:
                                                                TRIPATHI 2025.11.13
                                                                            16:05:59
                                                                            +0530

8. Petitioner examined as PW1 and she relied upon the following documents to show her entitlement i.e. a. Copy of death certificate of deceased Vivek Pandet Ex. PW1/1.

b. Publication reports Ex. PW1/2 & Ex. PW1/3. c. Necessary report from SDM concerned Ex. RW1/A (colly. 13 pages).

e. Report received from concerned Bank Ex. RW3/A (Colly. 18 pages).

f. Copy of Aadhar card of petitioner Ex. PW1/4 (OSR).

9. That vide separate statement of the petitioner, dt. 13.11.2025, petitioner's evidence was closed.

10. I have heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner. Case file perused.

11. A certificate can be granted to an applicant if it is found that the rights in the securities belong to the applicants. As per Section 373(3), even if the Court is not able to decide the right to certificate without determining the question of law or fact which seem to be too intricate and difficult for determination in a summary proceeding, the certificate may nevertheless be granted to the applicants if they appear to be the persons having prima- facia the best title therein.





      SC No. 12/2025       Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi    Page No. 5 of 7
                                                                              Digitally signed
                                                                              by ANIMESH
                                                                   ANIMESH BHASKAR
                                                                   BHASKAR MANI
                                                                            TRIPATHI
                                                                   MANI     Date:
                                                                   TRIPATHI 2025.11.13
                                                                              16:06:10
                                                                              +0530

12. Thus, from the averments made in the petition, report of SDM Ex. RW1/A (Colly. 13 pages) and report from concerned Bank Ex. RW3/A (Colly. 18 pages) with respect to debts and securities of deceased in the present petition and also perusal of the evidences, it is seen that petitioner Lata Pandey and Respondent no. 2 Anuja ( Wife of Deceased) both are class-1 Legal heirs of the deceased Vivek Pandey. Respondent no. 2 Anuja has objected and claimed the share. However, the entire share cannot be granted in her favour as the Petitioner is also a class-1 legal heir. As per Hindu Succession Act and rules of devolution of property, when there are multiple Class-1 heirs, the property is divided per capita. Therefore, there is no legal embargo for issuance of succession certificate in favour of the petitioner Lata Pandey and Respondent no.2 Anuja, who are the legal heirs of deceased Sh. Vivek Pandey as per Hindu Succession Act 1956, for an amount of Rs. 30,57,230/- alongwith the EPF Fund to be calculated by the concerned department at the time of disbursement, payable to the deceased Late Sh. Vivek Pandey.

13. Accordingly, petition is allowed and succession certificate be issued in equal share i.e. 50% each in favour of the petitioner namely Lata Pandey & Respondent no. 2 namely Anuja, for an amount of Rs. 30,57,230/- (Thirty Lakh Fifty Seven Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Rupees) in equal share i.e. 50% each alongwith the EPF Fund to be calculated by the SC No. 12/2025 Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Page No. 6 of 7 Digitally signed by ANIMESH ANIMESH BHASKAR BHASKAR MANI MANI TRIPATHI Date:

TRIPATHI 2025.11.13 16:06:21 +0530 concerned department at the time of disbursement, payable to deceased Late Sh. Vivek Pandey, along with interest or any other amount as may be enhanced or reduced till date, on filing of requisite Court Fees in terms of Article 12, Schedule I of the Court Fee Act 1870 as applicable to Delhi along with indemnity bond with one surety in the like amount.

14. File be consigned to Record Room after due ANIMESH Digitally signed by compliance. BHASKAR ANIMESH BHASKAR MANI TRIPATHI MANI Date: 2025.11.13 TRIPATHI 16:06:35 +0530 Announced in the open court (Animesh Bhaskar Mani Tripathi) on 13th November, 2025 ACJ-cum-ARC-cum-CCJ North-East District, KKD, Delhi SC No. 12/2025 Lata Pandey Vs. State of NCT of Delhi Page No. 7 of 7