Delhi District Court
Smt. Sushila vs The State on 13 February, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH. PRASHANT SHARMA, ADMINISTRATIVE
CIVIL JUDGE, NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS,
NEW DELHI.
SUCCESSION CASE NO. 31/13
1. Smt. Sushila, ... Petitioners
W/o. Late Sh. Ram Niwas,
R/o. WZ1440, Nangal Raya,
New Delhi110046
2. Master Sachin(Minor),
S/o. Late Sh. Ram Niwas,
R/o. WZ1440, Nangal Raya,
New Delhi110046
(through Smt. Sushila mother & natural guardian)
Versus
1. The State ... Respondents
2. Delhi Cantonment Board
Through it's Chief Executive Officer
Delhi Cantt.
PETITION FOR GRANT OF SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE
UNDER SECTION 372 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT,
1925.
Date of institution of the petition : 20.07.2013
ate on which judgment was reserved : 13.02.2014
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 13.02.2014
SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.1/7
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner Smt. Sushila and her minor son Master Sachin have applied for succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of pensionary benefits viz. death graduity, leave encashment, LIC(CGIES) and provident fund of late Sh. Ram Niwas, who was husband of Petitioner Smt Sushila and father of Master Sachin. It was prayed that Petitioner may be allowed to receive the said benefits along with interest accrued on it till date. It was alleged that Sh. Ram Niwas was working in the office of Delhi Cantonment Board, Delhi Cantt.10, Delhi. That he expired on 16.04.2013. His death certificate Ex. PW1/1 is on record. That he is survived by the Petitioners in question. That there are no other legal heirs of the said deceased, except the Petitioners in question. Identity card of the deceased relied by the Petitioners was Ex.PW1/2. Documents showing identity, relation and address of Petitioners and deceased relied by Petitioners were Ex.PW1/3 and Ex.PW1/4. That due to some inadvertent mistake, name of Petitioner Sushila was wrongly mentioned as Sheela in the official record of the office of employer of deceased in question. That the said Petitioner has made necessary intimation to the said employer vide a written letter Ex.PW1/5. That there is no legal impediment in granting succession certificate in favour of Petitioners in question.
2. The succession petition was filed and assigned to this court on 20.07.2013. Petitioners made state and office of employment of deceased in question as respondents. State was served through SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.2/7 publication in newspaper Veer Arjun whose copy is on record. Office where deceased in question was employed appeared through counsel and filed its reply to the effect that deceased in question was working in their office and was entitled to pensionary benefits as he died during the course of employment. Concerned SDM, through concerned Tehsildar, filed report on 19.09.2013, certifying the address of Petitioners and the fact that deceased in question is survived by legal heirs who are Petitioner in question.
3. Petitioner Smt. Sushila examined herself and had tendered her evidence Ex.P1 wherein she relied upon aforesaid documents, already exhibited and reiterated the contents of her petition, already mentioned by me in my preceding paragraphs in her affidavit. Same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
4. Petitioner has claimed that she is entitled to receive Rs. 24288/(as provident fund of her deceased husband), Death cum Retirement Gratuity(DCRG) of Rs. 499851/ and family pension of Rs. 5445/, as certified by the concerned department of Delhi Cantonment Board, vide its report mark A. Totaling the said terminal benefits comes out to Rs. 529274/ only.
5. After closure of petitioner's evidence, matter was fixed for judgment, after final arguments were heard by this Court. SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.3/7
6. Section 373 subsection (3) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 provides: '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 proceedings, he may nevertheless grant a certificate to the Petitioner if he appears to be the person having prima facie the best title thereto.'
7. From the averments made in the petition filed under section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and the statements of respondents, there is no objection to the grant of succession certificate in respect of pensionary benefits of deceased late Sh. Ram Niwas in favour of Petitioner Smt. Sushila, aged about 35 years, R/o. WZ1440, Nangal Raya, New Delhi110046 from the office of Delhi Cantonment Board, through Chief Executive Officer, Delhi Cantt.10, Delhi. So far as Petitioner Master Sachin is concerned, I am convinced that Petitioner Smt. Sushila is his legal guardian and she will do whatever is required for the welfare of the said child. Therefore there is no issue with regard to the said child being deprived from the benefit of the succession certificate in question. Based on aforesaid understanding of facts and law, I am inclined to issue succession certificate in this case in favour of Smt. Sushila only.
8. Petitioner Smt. Sushila is a resident of New Delhi and therefore SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.4/7 within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. So this petition was filed within proper jurisdiction. Petitioner Smt. Sushila has made proper parties and has not left any relevant party. Smt. Sushila has claimed the securities on the basis of official record, which is placed on record. Averments made by Petitioner were corroborated by the official record and not disputed by any of the respondents. No public person had raised any objection to the claim of Petitioner.
9. From the avernments made in the petition and evidence before me, I find that there is no legal embargo for issuance of succession certificate in favour of the Petitioner, who is one of the two legal heirs of deceased, pertaining to pensionary benefits of deceased late Sh. Ram Niwas in favour of Petitioner Smt. Sushila, aged about 35 years, R/o. WZ1440, Nangal Raya, New Delhi110046 from the office of Delhi Cantonment Board, through Chief Executive Officer, Delhi Cantt.10, Delhi
10. Accordingly, petition is allowed and succession certificate be issued to Petitioner Smt. Sushila in respect of Rs. 24288/(as provident fund of her deceased husband), Death cum Retirement Gratuity(DCRG) of Rs. 499851/ and family pension of Rs. 5445/, as certified by the concerned department of Delhi Cantonment Board, vide its report mark A. Totaling the said terminal benefits comes out to Rs. 529274/ only. The said succession certificate be issued on filing of requisite court fees of Rs. 13239/ only in terms of Article 12, Schedule I of the Court Fee SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.5/7 Act 1870 as applicable to Delhi alongwith indemnity bond in the sum of Rs. 529574/with one surety in the like amount. Case file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(PRASHANT SHARMA)
Announced in the open court ARC/ACJ/CCJ: New Delhi
on 13.02.2014 Patiala House Courts/13.02.2014
SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.6/7
SC NO. 31/13
13.02.2014
Present: Petitioner in person with counsel.
PW1 examined and discharged.
Vide my judgment of even date, present petition for issuance of succession certificate is allowed.
File be consigned to record room after necessary compliance.
(PRASHANT SHARMA) ARC/ACJ/CCJ: New Delhi Patiala House Courts/13.02.2014 SC No. 48/13 Mrs. Sushila Vs. The State & Ors Page no.7/7