Delhi District Court
Ankur Yadav vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 3 February, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANUJ AGARWAL: ACJcumCCcumARC
(SOUTHWEST): DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI.
Succession Case No.23/15
1.Ankur Yadav
S/o Late Sh. Vijay Singh
R/o C17, Laxmi Garden,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
2. Satya Devi
W/o Late Sh. Vijay Singh
R/o C17, Laxmi Garden,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Also at:
Hno. 150, Chhoti Patti
Village Paprawat, Delhi43.
3. Ruchika W/o Sh. Jitender
D/o Late Sh. Vijay Singh
Hno. 73, Nakhrola, Narsinghpur,
Farrukh Nagar, Gurgaon,
Haryana122004.
4. Maneesha W/o Jitender Yadav
D/o Late Sh. Vijay Singh
R/o Hno.7, Block P.U,
Pitam Pura, Delhi. .............Petitioners
vs.
1. State (NCT of Delhi)
2. The Branch Manager,
Punjab National Bank
Paprawat, New Delhi.
............Respondents
1 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15
.
Petition U/s 372 of Indian Succession Act for grant of Succession
Certificate in respect of debts and securities of deceased Sh Vijay
Singh @ Vijay Singh Yadav.
Date of Institution: 02.06.15
Date of Judgment: 03.02.16
JUDGEMENT:
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners 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 Vijay Singh @ Vijay Singh Yadav.
2. The State and Branch Manager Punjab National Bank Paprawat New Delhi have been impleaded as respondents.
3. It has been averred by the petitioners that deceased died on 19.03.15 at Dharamshila Hospital and Research Centre Dharamshila Marg, Vasundhara Enclave, New Delhi and he was the ordinary resident of Najafgarh, which falls within the jurisdiction of this court. It is further averred that deceased left behind the following legal heirs:
i) Petitioner no.1/Ankur Yadavson.
ii) Petitioner no.2/ Satya Deviwife.
iii) Petitioner no.3/ Ruchikadaughter.
iv) Petitioner no.4/Maneesha daughter.
2 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
4. Notice of the petition was issued and ordered to be published in the newspaper "Veer Arjun" on 12.10.15 but none appeared on behalf of public at large, to raise any objection to grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioners.
5. In petitioner evidence, four witnesses have been examined.
PW1/ petitioner no.1 proved the death certificate of his deceased father as Ex. PW1/B(OSR). He has deposed that that his deceased father died intestate without leaving any Will and besides himself, petitioner no.2 to 4 are the class 1 legal heirs of his deceased father. He further deposed that his grandmother namely Smt. Vidya Devi also died. Witness has filed self attested photocopy of his Voter I Card for his residential proof as Ex. PW1/C (OSR).
PW2 Ruchika, PW3 Maneesha and PW4 Satya Devi gave their no objection for grant of succession certificate, in favour of petitioner no.1 regarding debts and securities of deceased vide their separate statements.
Further, in respondent evidence, one witness has been examined.
3 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
RW1 is Smt. Sunita Kapoor Manager, Punjab National Bank Paprawat Branch New Delhi. She has proved the computer generated statement of account (Saving) bearing no. 3081000100023051 in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh reflecting balance amount of Rs. 17,51,571.18 as on 01.09.2015 as Ex. RW1/A. She has further proved computer generated statement of account (Saving) bearing no. 3081000100006858 in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh reflecting balance amount of Rs. 20,443.44 as on 07.09.2015 as Ex. RW1/B (colly.).
Thereafter, Petitioner Evidence was closed.
6. I have heard the arguments and perused the material on record carefully.
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 4 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
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".
8. From the oral and documentary evidence on record, my prima facie findings are as under: 8.1. The deceased was residing at Najafgarh, New Delhi which is reflected from his death certificates proved as Ex.PW1/B (OSR) which falls within the jurisdiction of this court.
8.2. The deceased had expired on 19.03.2015 leaving behind only four surviving class1 legal heirs i.e petitioner no.1 to petitioner 4. Petitioner no.2 to 4 have given their no objection in favour of petitioner no.1 in respect of debts and securities of deceased.
8.3. The deceased died intestate qua debts and securities as mentioned in the petition which is as follows:
Ex. RW1/A i.e computer generated statement of account (Saving) bearing no. 3081000100023051 in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh reflecting balance amount of Rs. 17,51,571.18 as on 01.09.2015.
5 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
Ex. RW1/B (colly.) i.e computer generated statement of account (Saving) bearing no. 3081000100006858 in the name of Sh. Vijay Singh reflecting balance amount of Rs. 20,443.44.
Therefore, the total value of the securities held by the deceased for which succession certificate has been applied for, turns out to be Rs. 17,72,014.62 alongwith interest if any, accrued thereupon.
8.4. 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.
9. In view of the aforesaid observations, I hold that the petitioner no.1 Ankur Yadav is entitled for grant of Succession Certificate U/s 373 of the Act in respect of the aforementioned securities having total value of Rs. 17,72,014.62 alongwith interest if any, accrued thereupon.
10. Accordingly succession certificate be issued to the petitioner no.1 Ankur Yadav 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 6 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
amount, within 15 days from today. Petition is accordingly, disposed of.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Anuj Agarwal) today i.e on 03.02.16 ACJ/CC/ARC/DC/ND 7 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .
03.02.16 Present: Petitioners with counsel.
PW1 to PW4 examined and discharged. PE stands closed, at request.
Final arguments heard.
By virtue of separate Judgment, Succession certificate has been granted to petitioner no.1 Ankur Yadav 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 15 days from today.
File be consigned to record room.
(Anuj Agarwal) ACJ/CC/ARC/DC/ND 03.02.16 8 Ankur Yadav & ors vs. State & ors.
SC23/15 .