Delhi District Court
Sh. Mam Chand vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 14 November, 2019
IN THE COURT OF HARVINDER SINGH,
ACJCCJARC, SHAHDARA,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
JUDGMENT
Sh. Mam Chand S/o Late Sh. Hari Chand R/o H. No.C3/659, Gali No.29, Harsh Vihar, Delhi - 110 093. ..................Petitioner Versus
1. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) SDM Office Seema Puri, Delhi.
2. Sh. Daya Chand S/o Late Sh. Hari Chand R/o Gali No.4, (Band Gali), 15 Feet Gali, Pal Chowk, Saboli Extn., Delhi - 110 093.
3. Smt. Santosh W/o Late Sh. Mul Chand
4. Sh. Johni S/o Late Sh. Mul Chand
5. Sh. Kallu S/o Late Sh. Mul Chand
6. Sh. Titu S/o Late Sh. Mul Chand all four R/o Gali No.4, (Band Gali), 15 Feet Gali, Pal Chowk, Saboli Extn., Delhi - 110 093.
(all LRs of deceased respondent no.03 Mul Chand)
7. State Bank of India Nand Nagari Market, Nand Nagari, Delhi - 110 093. ...................Respondents PETITION FOR GRANT OF SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 372 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.1 of 11
1. Date of Institution of Petition : 28.09.2015
2. Date of Judgment : 14.11.2019
3. Decision : Petition Allowed
1. Vide this Judgment this Court shall disposeoff petition filed by Sh. Mam Chand for grant of succession certificate in his favour in respect of debts and securities i.e. amount lying in the saving bank account no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi which existed in the name of Late Sh. Hari Chand. PETITIONER SIDE CASE
2. Succinctly, the case of petitioner as discernible from petition (materially relevant for present matter) is that petitioner is the son of Late Sh. Hari Chand who expired on 11.11.2014. At the time of his death, Late Sh. Hari Chand was ordinarily residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Petitioner is the son of deceased Late Sh. Hari Chand and Sh. Daya Chand (respondent no.02) and Sh. Mul Chand (respondent no.03) are other legal heirs of deceased Late Sh. Hari Chand along with petitioner. The deceased was maintaining one saving account no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi, the deceased has not made any testamentary deposition of said account/asset and the petitioner and respondent no.02 and 03 are entitled for succession certificate regarding said account, so, this petition. MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS
3. The record of Court file reflects that the notice of this petition was given to the general public by way of publication in the newspaper 'Mahamedha' on 07.11.2015 and to other respondents. The respondent no.02 appeared through counsel Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.2 of 11 and an application under Order XXII Rule 4 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as CPC) was moved on behalf of respondent no.03 submitting that the respondent no.03 has already expired. The said application was allowed vide order dated 06.10.2016 and present respondents no.03 to 06 were impleaded in place of deceased Mul Chand earlier respondent no.03. The respondent no.02 filed objections/written statement to the petition of the petitioner. The impleaded LRs of respondent no.03 chose not to file any written statement/reply to the petition and their case is they have no objection if succession certificate qua debts and liabilities in question is issued in favour of petitioner or same is issued for three equal parts i.e. one part for petitioner, one part for respondent no.02 and one part for them jointly. However, in response to the notice, no person from the general public had come forward to offer any objection(s) qua grant of succession certificate to the petitioner. RESPONDENT NO.02'S CASE AS PER HIS WRITTEN STATEMENT
4. The respondent no.02 filed objections and has submitted that the petitioner has not approached this court with clean hands, has suppressed material facts, has filed this petition to harass the respondent no.02 and to grab money lying in the account in question of deceased which existed with State Bank of India, Nand Nagri, Delhi. The deceased has nominated Sh. Vipin Pal (grandson of deceased), son of Daya Chand R/o D - 2/86/66, E - Block, Gali No.04, Saboli Extension, Delhi - 110 093 as nominee of said account so the petition is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost. The petitioner has no right, title or interest in the account in question due to said Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.3 of 11 nomination. With these averments, respondent no.02 prayed for dismissal of the petition.
PETITIONER SIDE EVIDENCE
5. The petitioner examined himself as PW1, tendered his examinationin chief vide affidavit Ex.PW1/A reiterating similar facts as of his petition and relied upon documents i.e. (a) Copy of election card of petitioner Ex.PW1/1 (OSR), (b) Copy of ration card of petitioner Ex.PW1/2 (OSR), (c) Copy of death certificate of deceased Sh. Hari Chand Ex.PW1/3 (OSR) and (d) Copy of statement of bank account of deceased bearing bank account no.30306307636 Ex.PW1/4 (collectively) (OSR) in his evidence. PW1 was crossexamined at length by Ld. Counsel for respondent no.02 which is not reproduced herein for sake of brevity. PW1 was examined and discharged. RESPONDENT SIDE EVIDENCE
6. RW1 Sh. Pawan Kumar, Junior Assistant, Office of SDM Seemapuri, Delhi has deposed that the legal heirs of the deceased namely late Sh. Hari Chand who expired on 11.11.2014 are Sh. Mam Chand (son), Sh. Mul Chand (son) and Sh. Daya Chand (son). Reply of the Executive Magistrate (Seema Puri), Shahdara, Delhi being Ex.RW1/1, application form/verification form alongwith copies of ID proofs of witnesses being Ex.RW1/2 (collectively) and his identity proof being Ex.RW1/3. RW1 was examined and discharged.
7. Respondent no.02 Sh. Daya Chand examined himself as RW2, tendered his examinationinchief vide affidavit Ex.RW2/A almost reiterating similar facts as of Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.4 of 11 their reply/written statement and exhibited documents i.e. (a) copy of his aadhar card Ex.RW2/1 and his voter ID card Ex.RW2/2 in his evidence. RW2 was crossexamined at length by Ld. Counsel for petitioner which is not reproduced herein for sake of brevity. RW2 was examined and discharged.
8. RW3 Smt. Santosh, wife of deceased respondent no.03 Mul Chand has deposed that she has no objection if the succession certificate with regard to debts and securities in question of deceased is granted in favour of petitioner or the amount is distributed equally in three parts i.e. one part for petitioner, one part for respondent no.02 and one part for respondents no.03 to 06. She exhibited her ID card as Ex.RW3/A (OSR) in her evidence. She was examined and discharged.
9. RW5 Sh. Kallu @ Vikas, son of deceased respondent no.03 Mul Chand has deposed that he has no objection if the succession certificate with regard to debts and securities in question of deceased is granted in favour of petitioner or the amount is distributed equally in three parts i.e. one part for petitioner, one part for respondent no.02 and one part for respondents no.03 to 06. He exhibited his ID proof as Ex.RW5/A (OSR) in his evidence. He was examined and discharged.
10. Sh. V. S. Chauhan, Ld. Counsel has also made a statement at bar on behalf of respondent no.04 (Sh. Johni) and respondent no.06 (Sh. Titu) that they have no objection if succession certificate with regard to debts and securities of deceased is granted in favour of petitioner namely Sh. Mam Chand or if the amount is distributed equally in three parts i.e. one part for petitioner, one part for respondent no.02 and one Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.5 of 11 part for respondents no.03 to 06. His identity proof was exhibited as Ex.RW5/A (OSR) on record. He was examined and discharged on behalf of respondent no.04 and 06.
11. RW7 Sh. Raman Kumar, Deputy Manager, SBI/respondent no. 4 has filed statements of account no.30306307636 maintained by Late Sh. Hari Chand with them having credit balance of Rs.11,52,552.50. He exhibited his ID proof as Ex.RW7/A (OSR) and the statement of account as Ex.RW7/B in his evidence. He also deposed that nominee of said account is one Vipin Pal. He was crossexamined and discharged. CONTENTIONS/SUBMISSIONS/ARGUMENTS 12.1 It is contended by petitioner side that the petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondents no.03 to 06 jointly being LRs of Late Sh. Mul Chand are entitled for succession certificate in equal parts qua debts and liabilities in question of deceased Sh. Hari Chand, so their petition be allowed in said terms.
12.2 On the other hand, the contention of respondent no.02 is that Sh. Vipin Pal, grandson of deceased is the nominee in the account in question and he was made nominee by the deceased so that he could receive the said amount. It is submitted that a settlement was made that the entire amount lying in bank account in question shall be received by nominee/grandson of deceased. The deceased has given one property situated at Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh to his daughterinlaw Smt. Savita in said settlement, so the petitioner was compensated vide same. It is submitted that petition of petitioner be rejected and succession certificate be issued only in favour of Sh. Vipin Pal as per nomination in the account in question.
Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.6 of 11 12.3 Submissions/contentions of both sides considered. Records perused. DISCUSSIONS 13.1 Lets first discuss the issue of nomination of Vijay Pal in the bank account in question by the deceased as it has come on record in evidence of RW7 that he is nominee in the account in question.
13.2 Section 45ZA of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 provides as under : "45ZA. Nomination for payment of depositors' money. (1) Where a deposit is held by a banking company to the credit of one or more persons, the depositor or, as the case may be, all the depositors together, may nominate, in the prescribed manner, one person to whom in the event of the death of the sole depositor or the death of all the depositors, the amount of deposit may be returned by the banking company.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any disposition, whether testamentary or otherwise, in respect of such deposit, where a nomination made in the prescribed manner purports to confer on any person the right to receive the amount of deposit from the banking company, the nominee shall, on the death of the sole depositor or, as the case may be, on the death of all the depositors, become entitled to all the rights of the sole depositor or, as the case may be, of the depositors, in relation to such deposit to the exclusion of all other persons, unless the nomination is varied or cancelled in the prescribed manner.
(3) Where the nominee is a minor, it shall be lawful for the depositor making the nomination to appoint in the prescribed manner any person to receive the amount of deposit in the event of his death during the minority of the nominee.
(4) Payment by a banking company in accordance with the provisions of this section shall constitute a full discharge to the banking company of its liability in respect of the deposit :
Provided that nothing contained in this subsection shall affect the right or claim which any person may have against the person to whom any payment is made under this section." 13.2 A bare reading of Section 45ZA of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 as reproduced above shows that any depositor with a bank may nominate a person in a prescribed manner, who, in event of death of depositor would be entitled to return of the money by the bank. The section also makes it clear that the payment made by bank in accordance with the provisions of the section shall constitute a full discharge to the bank of its liability in respect of the deposit. The proviso makes it crystal clear that Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.7 of 11 nothing contained in the section would effect the right or claim which any other person may have qua deposit or against the nominee.
13.3 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in matter of "Ram Chander Talwar & Anr. Vs. Devender Kumar Talwar & Ors." (2010) 10 SCC 671 has held as under : "Section 45ZA (2) merely puts the nominee in the shoes of the depositor after his death and clothes him with the exclusive right to receive the money lying in the account. It gives him all the rights of the depositor so far as the depositor's account is concerned. But it by no stretch of imagination makes the nominee the owner of the money lying in the account. It needs to be remembered that the Banking Regulation Act is enacted to consolidated and amend the law relating to banking. It is in no way concerned with the question of succession. All the monies receivable by the nominee by virtue of Section 45ZA (2) would, therefore, form part of the estate of the deceased depositor and devolve according to the rule of succession to which the depositor may be governed."
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in matter of "Shipra Sengupta Vs. Mridul Sengupta & Ors." (2009) 10 SCC 680 has held as under : "19. In view of the clear legal position, it is made abundantly clear that the amount in any head can be received by the nominee, but the amount can be claimed by the heirs of the deceased in accordance with law of succession governing them. In other words, nomination does not confer any beneficial interest on the nominee.........................." 13.4 In view of above discussions and case law, it is crystal clear that nomination of a person in a account does not confer ownership of the money lying in the account upon the nominee after the death of accountholder. It also does not effect the laws governing succession. Hence, there is no force in the contention of the respondent no.02 that the succession certificate should be issued or directions should be passed that amount be released in favour of nominee. Hence, same stands rejected.
14. Now lets discuss the other contention raised by the respondent no.02 that the petitioner side has already received one property vide settlement, therefore, the respondent no.02/his son Vipin Pal is entitled for succession/receiving the amount of Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.8 of 11 account in question. This Court vide this petition is only determining here who is entitled to succession certificate as per summary procedure prescribed under part X of The Indian Succession Act, 1925. The contested issues of settlement etc. are beyond the preview of this petition. Moreover, only RW8 has been examined to prove settlement of giving one property of Ghaziabad, UP to the daughterinlaw of petitioner and Sh. Vipin Pal, son of respondent no.02 being made nominee in account in question in pursuant to said settlement. No copy of any settlement/agreement etc. has been brought on record. In crossexamination, PW8 could not even tell since when Late Sh. Hari Chand was maintaining the bank account in question, when the nomination was made and when the alleged property was purchased by deceased which is deposed to be given to daughterinlaw of petitioner. In totality of circumstances, the said contention of respondent no.02 is also not tenable, hence, stands rejected.
15. Now, as per above discussions, the contentions of respondent no.02 are not tenable, so the succession certificate needs to be issued as per law of succession. This Court has considered the evidence on record. The deceased Sh. Hari Chand was maintaining a saving bank account bearing no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagri, Delhi and at present an amount of Rs.11,52,552.50 is lying in the said account. It is clear from the evidence of RW1, petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondents no.03 to 06 that the deceased has left behind petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondent no.03 (Mul Chand since deceased) as his legal heirs at the time of his death. Now since Sh. Mul Chand has also expired, therefore, present respondents no.03 Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.9 of 11 to 06 have stepped in to his shoes. No one from the public came forward to oppose succession petition despite publication in newspaper. Death certificate of Late Sh. Hari Chand has also been produced on record. Therefore, as per above discussions, succession certificate be issued in favour of petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondents no.03 to 06 (jointly) as to their entitlement of 1/3rd of the assets and liabilities of the deceased i.e. amount lying in the saving bank account no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi including interest, if any which existed in the name of Late Sh. Hari Chand.
16. The succession certificate shall be considered only as an entitlement of the petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondent no.03 to 06 (jointly) to receive the amount due towards Late Sh. Hari Chand with respect to amount lying in the saving bank account no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi which existed in the name of Late Sh. Hari Chand with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi. The succession certificate shall not be considered directions as such to the concerned officials/manager of concerned offices to release the aforesaid amounts and the manager/concerned authority(ies) of concerned office(s) shall be competent to seek compliance of formalities, if any, to be fulfilled by the petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondent no.03 to 06 for release of the aforesaid amount and further amount should be released only as per rules. Upon filing of requisite Court fees and indemnity bond(s) with surety bond(s) by petitioner, respondent no.02 and respondents no.03 to 06 (jointly) succession certificate be issued as to each of their entitlement of 1/3rd of Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.10 of 11 the assets and liabilities of deceased i.e. amount lying in the saving bank account no.30306307636 with State Bank of India, Nand Nagari, Delhi. File be consigned to Digitally signed by record room after due compliance as per law. HARVINDER HARVINDER SINGH SINGH Date:
Announced in the open Court 2019.11.14
15:32:05
on 14.11.2019. +0530
(HARVINDER SINGH)
ACJCCJARC/Shahdara,
KKD/Delhi/14.11.2019
Mam Chand Vs. State etc. SC No.7700/2016 (14.11.2019) Page No.11 of 11