Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Satyawati D/O Late Charan Singh vs State on 12 December, 2017

                                   

    IN THE COURT OF DHEERAJ MOR: ACJ­cum­CCJ­cum­ARC
         (SOUTH­WEST): DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI.

Succession Case­44/17
DLSW03­001023­2017
Satyawati D/o late Charan Singh 
W/o Devender Singh 
R/o 357/ Kutti Marpana, Mundela Kalan, 
South West, Delhi­73.                                                                                     .............Petitioner
            Vs.
1. State

2. Kasturi Devi
W/o late Charan Singh 
R/o 367 Kutti Marpana, Mundela Kalan, 
South west, Delhi­73.

3. Krishna
D/o late Charan Singh 
W/o Bijender
R/o 367 Kutti Marpana, Mundela Kalan,
 South west, Delhi­73.

4. Shakuntala  Devi
D/o late Charan Singh 
W/o Chand Ram 
R/o 244, Pooth Kalan, Village 
Sultanpuri, North West Delhi­86.

5.Urmila 
D/o late Charan Singh 
R/o 232 Village Holambi Khurd, 
Holambi Kalan, North west, Delhi­82.

6. Manager,
Bank of Baroda, Ujwa,
VPO Ujwa, New Delhi.                                                                         ...........Respondents

Page no.1 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.
                                                                                                                                                    SC­44/17
                                    

Petition   U/s   372   of   Indian   Succession   Act   for   grant   of
Succession   Certificate   in   respect   of   debts   and   securities   of
deceased Charan Singh.
                                  Date of Institution         : 02.06.17
                           Date of Reserving Judgment : 12.12.17
                                  Date of Judgment         : 12.12.17

                                                         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 Charan Singh.

2. The   State,   Kasturi   Devi,   Krishna,   Shakuntla   Devi, Urmila and Manager, Bank of Baroda, VPO Ujwa, New Delhi, has been impleaded as respondents.

PETITION:­

3. It has been averred by the petitioner that  Sh. Charan Singh died intestate at VPO Mundhela Kalan, New Delhi. It is further averred that deceased was the ordinary resident of Mundhela Kalan, New Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of this court. It is further averred that deceased was survived by five class­1 legal heirs i.e the petitioner (daughter of the deceased), respondent no.2 (wife of the deceased) and respondent nos. 3 to 5 (remaining daughters of the deceased). 

4. Notice   of  the  petition  was   ordered   to  be   published   in newspaper   and   accordingly   publication   was   done   in   newspaper Page no.2 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17                                     titled as "Veer Arjun" dated 14.09.17, but none appeared on behalf of public at  large, to raise  any objections for  grant  of succession certificate in favour of petitioner.

EVIDENCE:

5. In   petitioner   evidence,   only   one   witness   has   been examined.

5.1. PW­1 is petitioner Satyawati. She has proved the death certificate   of   her   deceased   father   as   Ex.PW1/B.   She   has   further proved the death certificate of her uncle namely Sh.Mange Ram as Ex.PW1/C.   She   has   deposed   that   her   father   died   intestate   and besides herself, respondent nos. 2 to 5 are the class one legal heirs of his belongings.  She has further  deposed that all of them have given their no objections for grant of succession certificate in her favour in respect of debts and securities of deceased as mentioned in the present  succession petition. She has placed on record her Aadhar card and the same is Ex.PW1/D(OSR). She has proved the Aadhar card of her deceased father as Ex.PW1/E (OSR) Thereafter, petitioner evidence was closed.

6. Further,   in   respondent   evidence,   five   witnesses   have been examined.

6.1. RW­1   Kasturi   Devi,   RW­2   Krishna,   RW­3   Shakuntla Devi   and   RW­4   Urmila  gave   their   no   objections   for   grant   of succession   certificate   in   favour   of   petitioner   regarding   debts   and securities of deceased vide their separate statements.

Page no.3 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17                                     6.2. RW­5   is   Ms.   Krati   Puri,   Branch   Manager   at   Bank   of Baroda, Ujwa branch, New Delhi­73. She has proved the statement of account bearing no. 21440100006652 in the name of Charan Singh reflecting   balance   amount   of   Rs.   1,10,131/­   as   on   01.10.17   as Ex.RW5/A. She has deposed that as per record, Sh. Mange Ram S/o Giani   Ram   (brother   of   the   account   holder)   is   the   nominee   of   the deceased   in   the   aforesaid   account   and   the   document   reflecting   the same is Ex.RW5/B. ARGUMENTS, APPREICIATION OF EVIDENC & REASONS:­

7. I have heard the arguments and perused the material on record carefully.

8. 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 Page no.4 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17                                     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".   

9. From the oral and documentary evidence on record, my prima facie findings are as under:­ 9.1. The   deceased   was   the   resident   of   Mundhela   Kalan, New Delhi,  which is reflected from his death certificate proved as Ex.PW1/B. It falls within the jurisdiction of this court. The nominee in the   bank   account   of   deceased   is   Sh.Mange   Ram   and   he   pre­ deceased the deceased Charan Singh.

9.2. The deceased had expired on 05.02.17 leaving behind five surviving class­1 legal heirs i.e Petitioner and respondent nos.2 to   5.   Respondent   nos.   2   to   5  have   given   their   no   objections   for issuance of succession certificate in favour of petitioner in respect of debts   and   securities   of   deceased   as   mentioned   in   the   present petition.  

DEBTS & SECURITIES:­ 9.3. The deceased died intestate qua debts and securities as mentioned in the petition which is as follows:­

(i).Rs.1,10,131/­ in his account no. 21440100006652 with Bank of Baroda, Ujwa branch, New Delhi.

Page no.5 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17                                     Therefore, the total value of the securities held by the deceased   for   which   succession   certificate   has   been   applied   for, turns out to be Rs.1,10,131/­.

9.4.   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 petition. CONCLUSION:­

10. In view of the aforesaid observations, this court holds that   petitioner   Satyawati   is   entitled   for   grant   of   Succession Certificate   U/s   373   of   the   Act   in   respect   of  the   aforementioned securities having total value of Rs.1,10,131/­ (Rupees One Lakh Ten Thousand One Hundred Thirty One only) alongwith interest if any, accrued thereupon.

11. Accordingly,   succession   certificate   be   issued   to   the petitioner Satyawati 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 12.12.17  ACJ/CCJ/ARC:South West District          Dwarka Courts: New Delhi.

Page no.6 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17                                     SC­44/17 DLSW03­001023­2017 Satyawati vs State & ors.

12.12.17 Present: Petitioner with counsel Sh. R.D.Kaushik.

Ms. Krati Puri, Bank of Baroda, Ujwa, New Delhi/  respondent no.6 has come present with ld. Counsel Sh.  Abhay Dixit.

Written  statement is filed on behalf of respondent no.6.  RW­5 Ms. Krati Puri and PW­1 Satyawati  are examined and discharged.

At   request,   petitioner   and   respondent   evidence   are closed.

Final   arguments   are   heard.   The   case   file   is   carefully perused.

By virtue of separate Judgment of even date announced in   the   open   court,   succession   certificate   be   issued   to   the   petitioner Satyawati in respect of debts and securities of deceased Sh.Charan Singh,  having  total  value  of  Rs.1,10,131/­  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: 12.12.17 Page no.7 of 6                                                                                                   Satyawati vs.  The State & ors.                                                                                                                                                     SC­44/17