Delhi District Court
Aditya Kumar Saboo vs State on 29 November, 2025
IN THE COURT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-
ADDITIONAL RENT CONTROLLER, CENTRAL DISTRICT,
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Presided Over By: Sh. Bharat Aggarwal
Petition No. : Succ. Court 120/2019
CNR No. : DLCT03-006333-2019
Aditya Kumar Saboo & Ors. Vs. State and Ors.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
1. Aditya Kumar Saboo
s/o Sh. K.C. Saboo
r/o 7340, Prem Nagar Gali No.01,
Near Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110007
2. Arvind Saboo
s/o Sh. K.C.,
r/o Prem Nagar Gali No.01,
Near Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110007
3. Priti Taparia
d/o Sh. K.C. Saboo,
w/o Sh. Prakash,
r/o B-128/F-3 Ramparstha,
Near Railway Line,
Ghaziabad, U.P
.....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. State
Govt. of NCT Delhi
2. Jai Prakesh Saboo (Since deceased)
Through his LRS:
(i) Meena Jaiprakash Saboo
w/o Late Sh. Jaiprakash Saboo
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 1 of 22
Digitally signed
by BHARAT
AGGARWAL
BHARAT
AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29
18:00:03
+0530
(ii) Ankit Jaiprakash Saboo
s/o Late Sh. Jai Parkash Saboo
(iii) Sneha Niraj Vyas
d/o Late Sh. Jai Parkash Saboo
All R/o:- A-303, Navarpan CHS Ltd.
Navghar Road Siddhivinayak Hospital Lane,
Bhayander (E) Ltd. District Thane-401105.
3. Pradeep Saboo (Since deceased)
Through his LRs:
(i) Shakuntla
w/o Pradeep Saboo
(ii) Shubham Saboo
s/o Pradeep Saboo
(iii) Akshath Saboo
s/o Pradeep Saboo
(iv) Anshu Saboo @ Anshu Soman
d/o Pradeep Saboo
All R/o:- Flat no.14, Vignesh apartment
12&13 kongu nagar, Mogappair,
Chennai-600037.
4. Manoj Saboo
s/o Sh. Hari Prasad Saboo
r/o 303, Navarpan Apartments,
Siddhivinayak Hospital Lane,
Bhayander (East) Mumbai-401105
5. Anusuya Devi Sodhani
d/o Sh. Hari Prasad Saboo
w/o Sh. Sohan Lal Sodhani
r/o 26, Shri Nath Apartment,
P.O. Panvel, Mumbai-410006
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 2 of 22
Digitally signed
by BHARAT
AGGARWAL
BHARAT
AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29
18:00:08
+0530
6. Vimal Maroo
d/o Sh. Hari Prasad Saboo
w/o Sh. Rav Shanker Maroo
r/o A-1-8-10, Mayur Coop.
Housing Society Ltd. Yashodham,
Goregaon, Mumbai-400063
7. Savita Madhania
d/o Sh. Hari Prasad Saboo
w/o Sh. Ramesh Mandhania,
r/o A/2, Triputi Apartment,
Flat No.1, Anand Nagar, Opp. C.S Road,
P.O Dahisar (East), Mumbai-400068
8. Amita Devi Kabra
d/o Sh. Hari Prasad Saboo
w/o Hira Lal Kabra
c/o Kishan Saree Center, Johar Building,
Room No.06 Market Road, Manglore, Karnataka
9. Archana Maheshwari
d/o Late Sh. Satya Narain Saboo
w/o Sh. Ajay Maheshwari
r/o 87, Bhagya Laxmi Aprt. Sector-9,
Rohini, Delhi-110085
10. Kamal Saboo
s/o Late Sh. Satya Narain Saboo
11. Mamta @ Mrs. Madhu Biyani
d/o Late Sh. Satya Narain Saboo
12. Pinki
d/o Late Sh. Satya Narain Saboo
Both R/o 30/A/135, Dr. Kirti Loha Street,
Near Maheshwari Mohalla, Rishara
Distt. Hawara, Kolkata
13. Vijay Kalayani
s/o Sh. Durga Dutt Kalyani
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 3 of 22
Digitally signed
by BHARAT
AGGARWAL
BHARAT
Date:
AGGARWAL 2025.11.29
18:00:13
+0530
r/o 50-B, Garighat Road, Gagandeep, Kolkata-19
14. Ajay Kalayani
s/o Sh. Durga Dutt Kalyani
r/o 1\62, Vidydhar Nagar, Jaipur-302023
15. Madhoo
w/o Sh. Anoop Biyani
r/o 94, Burmsh Colony, Nr. Sethi Colony, Jaipur
...RESPONDENTS
Date of institution : 31.08.2019
Date of judgment : 29.11.2025
JUDGMENT
1. The present succession petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of debts and securities of the deceased Late Smt. Krishan Kanta Saboo w/o Late Sh. Bajrang Lal Saboo (hereinafter referred as 'the deceased') who is stated to be the paternal aunt (chachi/tai) of petitioner no. 1, 2 and 3, and respondent no. 2 to 12 and maternal aunt (maami) of respondents no. 13 to 15.
2. It is averred in the petition that the deceased died issue- less and intestate on 06.11.2005 at Delhi. It is further stated that the deceased was an ordinary resident of 4-A, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110007, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. It is SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 4 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:25 +0530 further stated that the deceased is surviv ed by eighteen legal heirs i.e. the petitioner no. 1, 2, and 3 and respondent no. 2 to 15, being her husband's nephews and nieces.
3. It is averred that the deceased has left behind certain debts and securities as mentioned in 'Para-6' of synopsis dated 11.07.2025 filed by the petitioners. In the petition, petitioners have prayed for grant of succession certificate in respect of aforesaid debts and securities as mentioned in para 6 of the synopsis filed by the petitioner as the deceased is stated to have died intestate.
4. State has been impleaded as respondent no.1 in the present petition.
5. After filing of this petition, notice was given to the general public by way of publication in the newspaper "Hindustan Hindi" dated 17.10.2019 but none appeared from general public to oppose or contest the present petition.
6. During summary enquiry, eighteen witnesses were examined.
7. PW-1, Sh. Dalip Kumar, Sr. Head Messenger, State Bank of India, Kamla Nagar branch, Delhi brought the certified record in respect of two savings bank account bearing no. 10343856581 and 10343941852 lying in the name of the deceased having outstanding amount of Rs.1,37,426.05p & Rs.1,56,149/-
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 5 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:29 +0530 respectively. PW-1 relied upon the certified copies of statement of the said account as Ex. PW-1/1 (Collectively) running into four pages.
8. PW-2, Sh. Sanjay Kumar Verma, Officer, Bank of Baroda, Shakti Nagar branch, Delhi brought the certified record in respect of one saving bank account No. 00920100002616 lying in the name of the deceased having outstanding amount of Rs.17,847.84p. PW-2 relied upon the certified copy of the said account as Ex. PW-2/1 (Collectively) running into three pages.
9. PW-3, Sh. Navneet Kumar Singh, Marketing Officer, Canara Bank, 15-A, Kamla Nagar branch, Delhi brought the certified record in respect of one saving bank account No. 2011101001464 lying in the name of the deceased having outstanding amount of Rs.8,490.22p. PW-3 relied upon the certified copy of the said account as Ex. PW-3/1 (Collectively) running into two pages.
10. PW-4, Sh. Manohar Goenka, Dy. Manager, REC Limited, Core-4, Scope Complex, 7, Lodhi Road, Delhi deposed that as per their record, he had already transferred the funds i.e. redemption value of bonds amounting to Rs.31,615/- to Investor Education Protection Fund (IEPF), as per guidelines. PW-4 relied upon the certified copy of letter alongwith application form which was filled by deceased at the time of taking the said bonds, as Ex. PW-4/1 (Collectively) running into two pages.
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 6 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:34 +0530
11. PW-5, Sh. Mayank Singh Chauhan, Officer, Canara Bank, 15-A Kamla Nagar branch, Delhi, brought the certified copy of FDR having a/c No. 2011333000001 (Old No. 001669) lying in the name of Krishan Kanta Saboo, having balance amount of Rs.16,000/-. PW-5 relied upon the certified copy of ledger in respect of the said account as Ex.PW-5/1 (OS&R).
12. PW-6, Ms. Priyanka Kharbanda, Manager, Bank of Baroda, Shakti Nagar branch, Delhi, brought the certified record in respect of FDR No. 00920300002502 lying in the name of Mrs. Krishna having balance amount of Rs.1,59,822/-. PW-6 also brought the certified copy of statement of SB account bearing No. 00920100002616 having balance amount of Rs.11,139.84/-(wrongly mentioned as Rs.17,942.84p), lying in the name of Krishna. PW-6 relied upon the certified statement of the said accounts collectively as Ex.PW-6/1.
13. PW-7, Mr. Devender Kumar, Clerk, Bank of India, Kamla Nagar branch brought the certified record in respect of one saving bank account and six Fixed Deposit Receipts lying in the name of Krishan Kanta Saboo. PW-7 deposed that the Balance Confirmation Certificate in this regard has been issued by their Manager and he relied upon the same as Ex. PW-7/1. PW-7 also deposed that he brought the certified statement of account with regard to the PPF account bearing No. 60130PPF000000000336 lying in the name of Krishan Kanta Saboo having balance amount of Rs. 42,36,265.74/- and he relied upon the same as Ex. PW-7/2 SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 7 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:39 +0530 (Collectively) running into two pages.
14. PW-8, Manoj Kumar, Administrative Officer, LIC of India, Branch Office, 11J, 25, K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110012 brought the certified record in respect of two LIC Policies bearing no. 113124925 and 113125047 lying in the name of Krishan Kanta Saboo. PW-8 deposed that as per their record, amount of Rs.1,38,586/- each qua LIC Policy No. 113124925 and 113125047 have already been paid to the nominee Shri Ram Birla on 13.08.2007 and 28.11.2006 respectively and there is nothing due towards the said LIC Policies. PW-8 relied upon the certified copies of the documents in this regard as Ex. PW-8/3 (collectively) running into three pages.
15. PW-9, Jagbir Singh, General Assistant, Konkan Railway Corporation Limited, G-11, Railway Bhawan, Raisina Road, Delhi, brought the certified record in respect of 10 nos. of bonds having face value of Rs.1,000/- each with Folio No. KR-018335 (6B Series) allotted on 09.01.1997 or 10 years having maturity date on 09.01.2007. PW-9 further deposed that as per their record, the said bonds are redeemed and paid on 09.01.2007 by ECS mode to Smt. Krishan Kanta Saboo, Bank Account No. 285 with Bank of India, Kamla Nagar (KLN), for Rs.10,548/- out of which Rs.10,000/- towards principal amount and Rs.548/- towards interest for the period w.e.f. 01.01.2007 to 08.01.2007. PW-9 also deposed that there are nothing due towards the said bonds lying in the name of Krishan Kanta Saboo and he relied upon the written statement SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 8 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:43 +0530 alongwith documents in this regard as Ex. PW-9/2.
16. PW-10, Lok Raj Meena, PRI(P), Keshavpuram Post office, Delhi, brought the summoned record in respect of two NSCs having certificate No. 22DD194538 for Rs.5,000/- and 35CC640978 for Rs.1,000/- lying in name of the deceased and he relied upon the letters issued by the Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices alongwith the certified copies of the relevant record as Ex. PW-10/1 (Collectively).
17. PW-11, Surender Singh Bisht, Manager, Canara Bank, Kamla Nagar Branch, Delhi, brought the summoned record in respect of FDR having account No. 90404170000099 of Rs.50,000/-
lying in the name of Krishan Kanta. PW-11 deposed that as per their record, the proceeds of the said FDR had been sent to the Reserve Bank of India as no one has claimed the amount for the last 16 years as such, the bank is unable to disclose the maturity amount of the said FDR. PW-11 relied upon the certified statement of the ledger in this regard as Ex. PW-11/2. PW-11 deposed that as per procedure, upon order of release, the bank will send request to the Reserve Bank of India for remittance of the said amount to the beneficiary as per directions of the Court to Canara Bank.
18. PW-12, Mr. Atit Soni, Clerk, Bank of India, Kamla Nagar branch, Delhi, brought the summoned record in respect of demat account having client ID No. 00002455 (Old Number) (New No. 1302080000144161) lying in the name of the deceased and he SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 9 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:48 +0530 relied upon the same as Ex. PW-12/2 (running into 11 pages). PW-12 also deposed that he has also brought the summoned record pertaining to the deceased in respect to deposits and securities with the bank as follows:-
(i) Saving bank account bearing No. 601310100000285 having balance of Rs.13,94,670/- as on 16.11.2022;
(ii) QIC Account bearing no. 601343700004086, 601343700004087, and 601343700004088 having total outstanding amount of Rs.4,50,000/- in total;
(iii) FD accounts bearing no. 601345100000549 having outstanding amount of Rs.3,43,112.55/-, 601345100000951 having outstanding Rs.3,81,375.35/-, 601345100001000 having outstanding amount of Rs.3,62,589.58/-,
(iv) FD account bearing 601345100000952 (DBD-51547). As per bank record, the amount of Rs.
8,09,525/- qua the said FD has been paid to Manoj Kr. Saboo on 31.08.2012.
PW-12 relied upon the certified copies of statement of the said accounts as Ex.PW-12/3 (colly).
19. Petitioner took the witness stand as PW-13. PW-13 SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 10 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:52 +0530 tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW-13/A. PW-13 further relied upon the following documents:-
(i) Ex. PW-13/1 is the certified copy of death certificate of Smt. Krishna Kanta Saboo.
(ii) Ex. PW-13/2 is the certified copy of order dated 26.11.2011 passed in succession case No. 812/2005.
PW-13 was cross-examined and discharged on 19.10.2024.
20. Respondent no. 9 and respondents no. 2, 3, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 15 (through their SPA) were examined and discharged as RW-1. They all deposed that they have no objection for grant of succession certificate qua their shares in favour of the petitioners in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased.
21. Respondent no.4 (through SPA), respondent no.6 (through SPA), respondent no.7 (through SPA), and respondent no.8 (through SPA) were examined and discharged as RW-2, RW-3, RW-4 and RW-5 respectively. They deposed that they have no objection for grant of succession certificate qua their shares in favour of petitioners in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased.
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 11 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:00:57 +0530
22. The Court has heard submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and has perused the record.
23. Before proceeding further, the law pertaining to grant of succession certificate may be discussed for better understanding of the concept. It is trite that merely by grant of succession certificate, the holder does not become the owner of the estate of the deceased. In this regard, the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.K. Prahalada and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. [MANU/SC/7618/2008, (2008) 15 SCC 577] are relevant to be noted, which are as follows:
"A succession certificate is granted for a limited purpose. A Court granting a succession certificate does not decide the question of title. A nominee or holder of succession certificate has a duty to hand over the property to the person who has a legal title thereto. By obtaining a succession certificate alone, a person does not become the owner of the property."
24. It is also well settled that the holder of the certificate has a bounden duty to release the debt and securities of the deceased to the rightful claimant under the applicable law. Certain observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Atul Maithel vs. State Bank of India and Ors. [MANU/DE/3548/2017] are set out below:-
"14. As far as the only other contention is concerned, the Court granting the Succession Certificate only issues the certificate to declare to the public at large, of the grantee thereof being entitled, under orders of the Court, to collect the SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 12 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:01 +0530 debts and securities of the deceased and to give due discharge therefor. However, if any person holding such debts and securities refuses to return the same to the grantee or disputes debts and securities, the grantee will have to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery thereof and the proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate are by no stretch of imagination, proceedings for recovery or for mandatory injunction.
25. Furthermore, the order granting issuance of the succession certificate does not become executable as decree of the court. It only allows the grantee to receive the debts thereby discharging the debtor of the deceased relieving him from the multiple claims made for such a debt. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in this regard has further held in Sushila Devi Vs. State and Ors. [MANU/DE/3075/2017] that no execution proceedings lie against the debtor of the order passed under such proceedings and holder has to establish his claim independently in a civil suit. The findings of the court were as follows:-
"6. The counsel for the petitioner appears to be under a misconception of law that an order of issuance of Succession Certificate or a Succession Certificate is executable decree against the persons holding the debts and securities of the deceased.
7. A Succession Certificate only entitles the grantee thereof to claim and receive the debts and securities of the deceased, giving a full discharge to the persons who may be holding the said debts and securities, so as to relieve them from claim by multiple persons claiming to be the heirs of the SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 13 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:05 +0530 deceased. Before granting such Succession Certificate, in a proceeding for grant of Succession Certificate which in any case is summary in nature, the persons holding debts and securities are not required to be impleaded and a perusal of the order dated 14th November, 2014 ordering issuance of Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner also does not show Axis Bank, Khan Market, New Delhi and New India Insurance Co. Ltd. claimed to be holding the said debts and securities of the deceased to be parties thereto. Merely because an applicant for Succession Certificate has averred in the petition that the debts and securities mentioned in the application are due to the deceased, is no proof of the said debts and securities being due to the deceased and a proceeding for grant of Succession Certificate is not meant for adjudication of the said issues. If the persons who are claimed to be holding the debts and securities of the deceased dispute the claim, the entitlement in law of the grantee of the Succession Certificate is only to make a legal claim against them and not to execute the Succession Certificate or an order granting Succession Certificate.
9. I find the Supreme Court in Banarsi Dass Vs. Teeku Dutta MANU/SC/0333/2005 : (2005) 4 SCC 449 to have held (i) that the main object of a Succession Certificate is to facilitate collection of debts on succession and afford protection to parties paying debts to representatives of the deceased person; (ii) all that the Succession Certificate purports to do is to facilitate the collection of debts, to regulate the administration of succession and to protect persons who deal with the alleged representatives of the deceased persons; (iii) such a Certificate does not give any general power of administration on the estate of the deceased; (iv) the grant of a certificate does SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 14 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2025.11.29 18:01:11 +0530 not establish title of the grantee as the heir of the deceased; (v) a Succession Certificate is intended to protect the debtors, which means that where a debtor of a deceased person either voluntarily pays his debt to a person holding a certificate or is compelled by a decree of the Court to pay it to the person, he is lawfully discharged; and, (vi) the grant of a certificate does not establish a title of the grantee as the heir of the deceased, but only furnishes him with authority to collect his debts and allows the debtors to make payments to him without incurring any risk."
26. In the case of Madhvi Amma Bhawani Amma and others Vs. Kunjikutty Pillai Meenakshi Pillai and others. [AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2301=2000 AIR SCW 2432] 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 deceased and prevent their being time barred, 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 debts. The grant of a certificate to a person does not give him an absolute right to the debts nor does it bar a SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 15 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2025.11.29 18:01:15 +0530 regular suit for adjustment of the claims of the heir inter se".
27. Thus, to sum up, it can be inferred that the succession certificate ensures that process of release of debt of the deceased is streamlined and the debtor is provided security against numerous claims. The aim of such certificate is that it acts as conclusive proof for discharge of money against the debtor. The court granting the certificate is not required to determine the question of title and the Court by its order granting the certificate merely authorises one to collect the debts or securities of the deceased who then acts as a trustee to distribute the amount to the legal heirs of the deceased. Even though the proceedings for issuance of succession certificate are summary in nature yet, in terms of Rule 3(d) of Part B- Chapter 6- Volume II of the Delhi High Court Rules, the court can take sufficient evidence to enable it to form an opinion as to who is best entitled to the certificate in respect of the estate of the deceased.
28. Facts of the case shall be analyzed through the prism of legal position enunciated above.
29. As per the case of the petitioner, it stands established that the deceased died intestate on 06.11.2005. Section 15 (1) (a) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, inter-alia provides that when a hindu female dies intestate, her property shall devolve upon her husband and her children, including the children of her predeceased children. It is apparent from the record that Sh. Bajrang Lal Saboo i.e. husband of the deceased passed away on 18.09.1980 as also SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 16 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:22 +0530 reflected from the perusal of his death certificate. It is stated in the petition that the deceased and her husband Sh. Bajrang Lal Saboo died issue-less. Hence, the present case would fall under Section 15(1)(b) of the aforesaid Act, as per which the property of a female hindu shall devolve upon the heirs of the husband.
30. In these circumstances, Section 8 of the Act assumes importance and the court will have to ascertain whether there were any surviving Class-I legal heirs of husband of the deceased on the date of her death. As per the case of the petitioners, parents of the husband of the deceased had already predeceased the deceased and there is no reason to disbelieve the same as the said fact has remained uncontroverted throughout the proceedings. Hence, it can be deduced that there was no surviving Class-I legal heir of the husband of the deceased on the date of her death. As a necessary consequence, the court will have to ascertain whether there was any surviving Class-II legal heirs of husband of the deceased on the date of her death.
31. Father of husband of the deceased Sh. Vasudev Saboo had also predeceased the deceased as per the case of the petitioners. Further, as per the case of the petitioners, all the brother and sisters of Sh. Bajrang Lal Saboo had already passed away prior to the date of death of the deceased i.e. 06.11.2005.
32. Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 inter-alia provides that when a hindu male dies intestate, his property shall SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 17 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:29 +0530 first devolve upon the Class-I legal heirs specified in the Schedule of the Act and in the absence of such heirs, it shall devolve upon the heirs specified in Class-II of the Schedule. Section 9 of the Act further provides that heirs specified in Class-I shall take simultaneously whereas those in first entry of Class-II shall be preferred to heirs in the second entry and so on. Therefore, it becomes clear that upon the death of the intestate, all surviving heirs mentioned under Class-I category shall take equal shares in the estate of the deceased and upon absence of any such heir, heirs in first entry of Class-II shall take away entire estate if they are alive. Similarly, if there is no heir in first entry of Class-II, heirs in second entry shall be given precedence over the next entry and so on.
33. Therefore, the property of the deceased shall devolve upon children of brothers and sisters of her husband in accordance with Entry IV, Class II of the Schedule as there are no legal heirs in Entry I to III of Class-II. Accordingly, upon the death of the deceased, her property shall notionally devolve upon legal heirs of her husband i.e. petitioners no. 1 to 3 and respondents no.2 to 15 who happens to be sons and daughters of the brothers and sisters of husband of the deceased. Hence, all such parties would take per capita in terms of Section 11 read with Section 19 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and they shall be entitled to 1/17th share each in the debts and securities of the deceased.
34. However, respondents no. 2 to 12 and 14 & 15 have given their no objection for grant of succession certificate in favour SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 18 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:35 +0530 of petitioners qua their shares in the debts and securities of the deceased. Perusal of record further reveals that vide order dated 10.11.2025, respondent no.13 was proceeded ex-parte due to his non-appearance despite service.
Accordingly, petitioners no. 1 to 3 shall be entitled to grant for succession certificate to the extent of 16/51 share each in the debts and securities of the deceased. In total, all the petitioners are entitled to grant of succession certificate to the extent of 48/51 share. Further, respondent no.13 shall be entitled to 1/17th share in the debts and securities of the deceased. As per the death certificate of the deceased, she used to reside at 4-A, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110007, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
35. Succession certificate is sought qua following debts and securities of the deceased :-
(i) Two savings bank account bearing no.
10343856581 and 10343941852 having outstanding amount of Rs.1,37,426.05p & Rs.1,56,149/- respectively maintained with State Bank of India, Kamla Nagar Branch, Delhi.
(ii) One saving bank account bearing No. 2011101001464 having outstanding amount of Rs.8,490.22p maintained with Canara Bank, Kamla Nagar, Delhi.
(iii) Redemption value of bonds amounting to SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 19 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:40 +0530 Rs.31,615/- maintained with REC Ltd. had already been transferred to Investor Education Protection Fund (IEPF).
(iv) FDR having a/c No. 2011333000001 (Old No. 001669) having balance amount of Rs.16,000/- maintained with Canara Bank, Kamla Nagar, Delhi.
(v) FDR bearing No. 00920300002502 having balance amount of Rs.1,59,822/- maintained with Bank of Baroda, Shakti Nagar, Delhi.
(vi) One savings bank account bearing No. 00920100002616 having balance amount of Rs.11,139.84p, maintained with Bank of Baroda, Shakti Nagar, Delhi.
(vii) One saving bank account bearing no.601310100000285 having amount of Rs.13,94,670.14/- and three Fixed Deposit Receipts bearing nos. 601345100000549, 601345100000951, 601345100001000 having balance of Rs.3,43,112.55/-, Rs.3,81,375.35/- and Rs.3,62,589.58/-
respectively maintained with Bank of India, Kamla Nagar, Delhi.
(viii) PPF account bearing No. 60130PPF000000000336 having balance amount of
Rs.42,36,265.74/- maintained with Bank of India, Kamla Nagar, Delhi.
SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 20 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:45 +0530
(ix) Two NSCs having certificate No. 22DD194538 for Rs.5,000/- and 35CC640978 for Rs.1,000/-
maintained with Keshavpuram Post Offices.
(x) FDR bearing account No. 90404170000099 having amount of Rs.50,000/- maintained with Canara Bank, Kamla Nagar.
(xi) One DMAT account bearing no.1302080000144161 (1302080500002455-old number) having amount of Rs.47,44,499.55/- maintained with Bank of Baroda, Kamla Nagar, Delhi.
Total value of securities held by deceased turns out to be Rs.1,20,39,154.80/-.
36. In view of the evidence adduced on record which has remained unrebutted and uncontroverted, the Court is of the considered opinion that there is prima-facie no impediment for grant of Succession Certificate in favour of petitioners no. 1 to 3 to the extent of 16/51 share each and respondent no.13 to the extent of 1/17th share in the debts and securities of the deceased in terms of Ex.PW-1/1, Ex.PW-3/1, Ex.PW-4/1, Ex.PW-5/1, Ex.PW-6/1, Ex.PW-7/2, Ex.PW-10/1, Ex.PW-11/2, Ex.PW-12/2 and Ex.PW-12/3, having total amount of Rs.1,20,39,154.80/-.
37. Succession certificate be drawn on deposit of requisite SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 21 of 22 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:49 +0530 proportionate court fees of Rs.3,00,978.87/- (i.e. Rs. 2,83,274.23/- to be paid in total by petitioners no. 1 to 3 and the balance fee i.e. Rs.17,704.64/- to be paid by respondent no.13) in terms of Article 12 of Schedule I of Court Fees Act, 1870, as applicable in Delhi and on furnishing an Indemnity Bond and Surety Bond with one surety each within 30 days from today.
Petition is accordingly disposed off.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by BHARATBHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2025.11.29 18:01:55 +0530 ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (Bharat Aggarwal) Today i.e. 29.11.2025 ACJ-cum-ARC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi Present judgment consists of 22 pages and each page bears my initials. Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date:
AGGARWAL 2025.11.29 18:02:00 +0530 (Bharat Aggarwal) ACJ-cum-ARC, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts 29.11.2025 (A) SC No. 120/19 Aditya Saboo & Ors. Vs. State & Ors. Page No. 22 of 22