Delhi District Court
Smt. Manju vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 23 March, 2018
IN THE COURT OF DHEERAJ MOR: ACJcumCCJcumARC
(SOUTHWEST): DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI.
Succession Case5/14
DLSW030003742014
Smt. Manju
W/o late Sh. Puneet Kumar
D/o Sh. Veer Singh
R/o H.no. WZ111, Harijan Basti,
Balmiki Vihar, Palam, New Delhi.
Presently at:
H.no. 63, Village Jangola No.1,
PO & Village Palla, Delhi110036. .............Petitioner
vs.
1.State of NCT of Delhi, New Delhi.
2. Office of The Senior Superintendent
Department of Post,
Air mail Sorting Division,
New Delhi110021
Through Senior Superintendent
3. Ms. Annu D/o Late Shri Pal
R/o Hno. WZ111, Harijan Basti,
Balmiki Vihar, Palam, New Delhi.
4. Ms. Pooja D/o Late Shri Pal
R/o Hno. WZ111, Harijan Basti,
Balmiki Vihar, Palam, New Delhi.
...........Respondents
Petition U/s 372 of Indian Succession Act for grant of
Succession Certificate in respect of debts and securities of
deceased Sh. Puneet Kumar.
Date of Institution : 24.02.2014
Date of Reserving Judgment : 22.03.2018
Date of Judgment : 23.03.2018
Page no.1 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14
JUDGMENT:
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner 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 of deceased Sh. Puneet Kumar.
2. The State, Office of The Senior Superintendent, Department of Post, AIR mail Sorting Divison, New Delhi, Annu and Pooja, have been impleaded as respondents.
PETITION:
3. It has been averred by the petitioner that Sh. Puneet Kumar died intestate in a road accident at Riwardi, Haryana on 29.07.2012. It is further averred that deceased was the ordinary resident of Palam, New Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of this court. It is further averred that deceased was survived by the petitioner (wife of the deceased), Smt. Vimla Devi (mother of the deceased), respondent nos.3 Ms. Annu and respondent no.4 Pooja (real sisters of the deceased). During trial, Smt. Vimla Devi had expired and respondent nos.3 & 4 are the legal heirs of Smt. Vimla Devi.
4. Notice of the petition was ordered to be published in newspaper and accordingly publication was done in newspaper titled as "Veer Arjun" dated 22.03.18, but none appeared on behalf of public at large, to raise any objections for grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioner.
Page no.2 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14
5. Written statement / objections were filed on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4, wherein they have sought dismissal of the present petition on the ground that the petitioner is not the nominee of the deceased in his official records.
EVIDENCE:
6. In petitioner evidence, two witnesses have been examined.
6.1. PW1 is petitioner Smt. Manju. She has tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A. She has relied upon the following documents.
1. Ex.PW1/1 is original death certificate of deceased Puneet Kumar;
2. Mark A (colly) is copy of FIR no. 294/12;
3. Ex.PW1/3 (OSR)(Colly.) is copy of application for ordinary loan of The Postal and R.M.S.Employees Cooperative Bank Ltd., Ambala Cantt., in the name of deceased Puneet Kumar;
4. Mark B is copy of marriage invitation card of deceased Puneet Kumar;
5. Ex.PW1/5(OSR) is copy of reply dated 12.12.12 regarding payment of NPS and other consequential benefits in respect of late Sh. Puneet Kumar Ex.MTS expired on 29.07.12 bearing ref. no.B 1/195/201213; and
6. Ex.PW1/6 (OSR) is the copy of envelope addressed to the petitioner from Head Record Officer, Account, Air Mail Stg. Division, New Delhi.
Page no.3 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14
She has deposed that her husband died intestate and he is survived by Smt. Vimla Devi, Ms. Annu, Ms. Pooja and herself. She has further deposed that her father in law Sh. Sripal had expired. She has placed on record her Aadhar card and the same is Ex.PW1/7(OSR). She was cross examined by ld. Counsel for respondent nos. 3 & 4.
6.2. PW2 is Sh. Kamaljeet, Assistant Superintendent, Department of Post, Air Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi. He has proved the record pertaining to deceased Puneet Kumar pertaining to his service benefits i.e family pension Rs. 3,500/ (per month plus DR and CGEGIS Rs.30,908/ and NPS (employee contribution) Rs. 35,207/ as Ex.PW2/A. Thereafter, petitioner evidence was closed.
7. During course of proceedings, at the joint request of the parties, matter was referred to Mediation Cell where it has been amicably settled. As per settlement, the petitioner has agreed to pay Rs. Five lakhs to respondent nos. 3 & 4 by way of two equated installments. It is further agreed that first installment of Rs. 2.5 lakhs, which is to be equally shared by respondent nos. 3 & 4, be paid by the petitioner to them on 29.01.18. The same is accordingly paid to them. In respect of remaining Rs. 2.5 lakhs, they have agreed that the same shall be paid within three months of taking up of the service by the petitioner with respondent no.2 on the compassionate ground. Respondent nos.3 & 4 have agreed to give their no objections for release of debts and securities of the deceased in Page no.4 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14 favour of the petitioner after receipt of the first installment of Rs. 2.5 lakhs. Accordingly, respondent nos. 3 & 4 have given their no objections for grant of succession certificate in faovur of petitioner Manju in respect of debts and securities of their deceased brother Puneet Kumar. Joint statement of said respondents Ms. Annu and Ms. Pooja, on oath regarding the said settlement was also recorded.
8. Further, in additional statement of petitioner dated 29.01.18, she has deposed that in accordance with the settlement arrived between her and both respondents namely Ms. Annu and Ms. Pooja before the Mediation cell dated 13.12.1017, she shall pay remaining amount Rs 1.25 lakhs each to both the respondents Ms. Annu and Ms. Pooja within 03 months after obtaining the employment/ service on the compassionate grounds with respondent no.2.
ARGUMENTS, APPREICIATION OF EVIDENC & REASONS:
9. I have heard the arguments and perused the material on record carefully.
10. 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 Page no.5 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14 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 does it bar a regular suit for adjustment of the claims of the heirs inter se".
11. From the oral and documentary evidence on record, my prima facie findings are as under: 11.1. The deceased was the resident of Palam, New Delhi, which is reflected from his death certificate proved as Ex.PW1/1. It falls within the jurisdiction of this court. 11.2. The deceased had expired on 29.07.2012 leaving behind two class1 legal heirs i.e Petitioner (wife of the deceased) and Smt. Vimla Devi(since deceased)(mother of the deceased). However, during proceedings, Smt. Vimla Devi (mother of the deceased) also expired. The respondent nos.3 & 4 are the legal heirs of Smt. Vimla Devi. However, as per their settlement in the mediation cell, they have given their no objections for issuance of Page no.6 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14 succession certificate in favour of petitioner in respect of debts and securities of deceased as mentioned in the present petition. 11.3. The matter has been settled between the petitioner and respondent nos. 3 & 4 for a total sum of Rs. 5,00,000/ before the Mediation Cell vide settlement dated 13.12.17. As per said settlement, a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/ (Rs. 1.25 lakhs each) has already been by the petitioner to respondent nos. 3 & 4 paid on 29.01.18 and petitioner undertook to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 2,50,000/ (Rs. 1.25 lakhs each) to the said respondents within 03 months after obtaining the employment/ service on the compassionate grounds with respondent no.2. The petitioner is directed to remain bound by her statement.
DEBTS & SECURITIES: 11.4. The deceased died intestate qua debts and securities as mentioned in the petition which is as follows:
(i). Family pension Rs. 3,500/ per month plus DR;
(ii). CGEGIS Rs.30,908/; and
(iii). NPS (employee contribution) Rs. 35,207/. All the said three accounts maintained with Department of Post, Air Mail Sorting Division, New Delhi.
Therefore, the total value of the securities held by the deceased for which succession certificate has been applied for, turns out to be Rs.66,115/ plus family pension of Rs. 3,500/ per month with DR.
Page no.7 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14
11.5. 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 petition. CONCLUSION:
12. In view of the aforesaid observations, this court holds that petitioner Manju is entitled for grant of Succession Certificate U/s 373 of the Act in respect of the aforementioned securities having total value of Rs.66,115/ (Rupees Sixty Six Thousand One Hundred Fifteen only) plus family pension of Rs. 3500/ per month with DR alongwith interest if any, accrued thereupon.
13. Accordingly, succession certificate be issued to the petitioner Manju on filing of corresponding court fees in terms of Article 12 Schedule I of Court Fees Act, 1870 as applicable in Delhi and Indemnitycumsurety bond of the like amount, within 30 days from today. Petition is accordingly, disposed of.
File be consigned to record room, after due diligence.
Announced in the open court (Dheeraj Mor)
today i.e on 23.03.18 ACJ/CCJ/ARC:South West District
Digitally
signed by Dwarka Courts: New Delhi.
DHEERAJ
DHEERAJ MOR
MOR Date:
2018.03.23
16:58:43
+0530
Page no.8 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14
Succession Case5/14
DLSW030003742014
Smt. Manju vs. The State & ors.
23.03.18
Present: None.
By virtue of separate Judgment of even date announced in the open court, succession certificate be issued to the petitioner Manju in respect of debts and securities of deceased Sh. Puneet Kumar, having total value of Rs.66,115/(Rupees Sixty Six Thousand One Hundred Fifteen only) plus family pension of Rs. 3,500/ per month with DR, alongwith interest if any, accrued thereupon as detailed in the judgment, on filing of corresponding court fees in terms of Article 12 Schedule I of Court Fees Act, 1870 as applicable in Delhi and Indemnitycumsurety bond of the like amount, within 30 days from today.
File be consigned to record room, after due compliance.
(Dheeraj Mor)
ACJCCJARC (SW)
Dwarka Courts: 23.03.18
Page no.9 of 8 Manju vs. The State & ors.
SC5/14