Delhi District Court
Ayodhya Prasad vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 19 August, 2013
IN THE COURT OF MS. SURYA MALIK GROVER: ACJCUMCCJ
CUMARC (SOUTHWEST):DWARKA COURTS:NEW DELHI
SUCCESSION CASE NO. 18/11
Ayodhya Prasad
S/o Sh. Bhaggu Ram
R/o H. No. 12/3
Railway Colony,
Sarojini Nagar,
New Delhi ...............Petitioner
vs.
1. The State (NCT of Delhi)
2. Divisional Railway Manager (DRM)
DRM Office : Northern Railway,
Delhi Division, State Entry Road,
New Delhi Railway Station,
New Delhi55. ...............Respondents
Petition U/s 372 of Indian Succession Act for grant of Succession
Certificate in respect of debts and securities of Smt. Devki Devi.
Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi)
SC18/11
: 1 :
Date of Institution : 23.03.2011
Date of Reserving Order: 19.08.2013
Date of Judgment : 19.08.2013
JUDGMENT:
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner Ayodhya Prasad for grant of Succession certificate U/s 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (herein after referred to as the Act), in respect of debts and securities etc. of Smt. Devki Devi.
2. The State and Divisional Railway Manager (DRM) have been impleaded as the respondents.
3. It has been averred by the petitioner that the ordinary place of residence of his deceased mother Devki Devi was at Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi which falls within the jurisdiction of this court. It has been averred by the petitioner that the deceased Devki Devi has died intestate and left behind only one class I legal heir namely petitioner, himself.
Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 2 :
4. Notice of the petition was issued in the newspaper "Vande Materam" on 17.04.201a but none appeared on behalf of public at large, to raise any objection to grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioner.
5. In support of the case, the petitioner Ayodhya Prasad has examined one witness.
(i) PW1 Ayodhya Prasad, has deposed on oath that his mother Smt. Devki Devi expired on 26.01.2007 and her death certificate has been proved as EX.PW1/B. Further, it is stated that his father Sh. Bhaggu had expired on 13.07.2000 at Central Hospital, Connaught Place, New Delhi and affidavit to this effect has been proved as EX.PW1/D. Further, it is stated that his mother Smt. Devki Devi died intestate leaving behind him as the only classI legal heir of his deceased mother Smt. Devki Devi.
The witness has proved letter/documents showing the debts and securities of deceased Devki Devi issued by Employer i.e. respondent No. 2 as EX.PW1/C. The witness has proved self attested photocopy of his office ICard bearing No. 554 for his residence proof.
Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 3 : Thereafter, petitioner evidence was closed.
6. I have heard the arguments advanced by Ld counsel and have perused the material on record.
7. In Madhvi Amma Bhawani Amma & Ors. Vs. Kunjikutty Pillai Meenakshi, AIR 2000 SC 2301, 2000 (3) ALT 35 SC, 2001 (49) BLJR 813, it was held as under:
" The enquiry in proceedings for grant of succession certificate is to be summary, and the Court, without determining questions of law or fact, which seem to it to be too intricate and difficult for determination, should grant the certificate to the person who appears to have prima facie the best title thereto. In such cases the Court has not to determine definitely and finally as to who has the best right to the estate. All that it is required to do is to hold a summary enquiry into the right to the certificate, with a view, on the one hand, to facilitate the collection of debts due to the deceased and prevent their being timebarred, owing (for instance) to dispute between the heirs inter se as to their preferential right to succession, and, on the other hand, to afford protection to the debtors by appointing a representative of the deceased and authorising him to give a valid discharge for the debt. The grant of a certificate to a person does not give him an absolute right to the debt nor Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 4 : does it bar a regular suit for adjustment of the claims of the heirs inter se".
8. From the oral and documentary evidence on record, my prima facie findings are as under: 8.1 The deceased Smt. Devki Devi died intestate qua debts and securities i.e. PF, GIS and DCRG.
8.2 The deceased Smt. Devki Devi was having permanent resident at Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi as is reflected from photocopy of ration card which falls within the jurisdiction of this court.
8.3 The petitioner had deposed that he is the sole surviving legal heir of the deceased as he has no siblings and his father had expired which has been proved vide affidavit EX.PW1/D placed on record. 8.4 EX.PW1/C reflects that the deceased was having Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 5 : following service benefits: ____________________________________________________ Sl. No. Particulars Amount due (Rs.) _____________________________________________________
1. PF Rs. 13869/
2. GIS Rs. 15591/
3. DCRG Rs. 33777/ ___________________________________________________ Total Rs. 63,237/ ____________________________________________________ Therefore, the total value of the debts and securities held by deceased for which succession certificate has been applied for turns out to be Rs. 63,237/.
8.5 The aforesaid claim of the petitioner has gone unrebutted and nobody has appeared on behalf of the public to contest the claim of the petitioner. There is also no impediment U/s 370 of the Act to grant Succession Certificate with respect to debts and securities as mentioned in the application.
Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 6 :
9. In view of the aforesaid observations, I hold that the petitioner Sh. Ayodhya Prasad is entitled for the grant of Succession Certificate U/s 373 of the Act in respect of the aforementioned debts and securities having total value of Rs. 63,237/ alongwith interest accrued thereon, if any.
10. Accordingly, succession certificate be issued to the petitioner Sh. Ayodhya Prasad on filing of court fees of Rs. 1,580.925 in terms of Article 12 Schedule I of Court Fees Act, 1870 as applicable in Delhi and Indemnity cumsurety bond of the like amount, within 15 days from today.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the (Surya Malik Grover) open court on ACJcumCCJcumARC 19.08.2013 Dwarka Courts: New Delhi
Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 7 : Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 8 : Ayodhya Prasad Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) SC18/11 : 9 :