Delhi District Court
Kamla Devi vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 11 February, 2026
IN THE COURT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL JUDGE-
CUM-ADDITIONAL RENT CONTROLLER, CENTRAL
DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Presided Over By: Sh. Bharat Aggarwal
Petition No. : Succ. Court 49/2020
CNR No.: DLCT03-001820-2020
Kamla Devi Vs. The State & Ors.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Kamla Devi
w/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar
r/o A-798, Upper Ground First Floor,
Shashtri Nagar, Delhi-110052
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State (NCT Delhi)
Through Chief Secretary
Old Secretariat, Delhi
2. Sandeep Kumar
s/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar
r/o A-798, Upper Ground First Floor,
Shashtri Nagar, Delhi-110052.
3. Ircon International Limited
Through its Directors/MD
C-4, District Centre,
Saket, Delhi-110017
4. Rajni
r/o House no.381,
Kuldeep Colony, Near Chandpur,
Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil- Jagadhiri
Distt. Yamuna Nagar, Haryana.
...RESPONDENTS
SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 1 of 15
Digitally signed
by BHARAT
AGGARWAL
BHARAT
AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11
17:37:34
+0530
Date of institution : 13.03.2020
Date of judgment : 11.02.2026
JUDGMENT
1. The present succession petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of debts and securities of the deceased Late Sh. Raj Kumar s/o Late Sh. Data Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') who is stated to be the husband of petitioner and father of respondent no. 2.
2. It is averred in the petition that the deceased died on 09.11.2019 at Delhi. It is stated that the deceased was an ordinary resident of A-798, Upper Ground First Floor, Shastri Nagar, Delhi-110052, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. It is further stated that deceased is survived by two legal heirs i.e. the petitioner, being his widow, and respondent no. 2, being his son. It is pertinent to mention here itself that vide order dated 29.09.2021, court directed the petitioner to implead Ms. Rajni as respondent no.4 in the present petition after perusal of document filed by respondent no.3 which inter-alia disclosed that said Ms. Rajni is the first wife of the deceased. Respondent no.4 also alleged that the deceased re-married petitioner without getting divorce from her.
3. State has been impleaded as respondent no.1 in the present petition.
SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 2 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:37:38 +0530
4. After filing of this petition, notice was given to the general public by way of publication in the newspaper "Veer Arjun" dated 20.01.2021 but none appeared from general public to oppose or contest the present petition. It is pertinent to mention here that the matter was vehemently contested and opposed on behalf of the respondent no.4 on the ground that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased and out of the said wed-lock one daughter namely Reena Devi was born on 1991. It was further stated that the deceased re-married the petitioner without getting divorce from her. An application was also filed seeking impleadment of Ms. Reena Devi as respondent no.5 in the present petition.
5. Perusal of record reveals that vide order dated 02.09.2025, the present matter was referred to Mediation Centre and vide mediation settlement dated 09.09.2025, the matter was received back from the Mediation Centre as settled. In terms of such mediation settlement agreement dated 09.09.2025, a post dated cheque dated 15.01.2026 bearing no.944880 was handed over by petitioner to respondent no.4 for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-.
6. It is averred that the deceased has left behind his service dues with his employer i.e., Ircon International Limited i.e., respondent no.3. In the petition, petitioner has prayed for grant of succession certificate in respect of said service dues of the deceased.
7. In order to substantiate their case, the petitioner examined three witnesses.
SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 3 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:37:42 +0530
8. Petitioner took the witness stand as PW-1 and tendered her evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A. PW-1 also relied upon the following documents:
(i) Ex. PW-1/1 (OS&R) is the copy of
my Aadhar Card;
(ii) Mark A is the copy of service ID card
of the deceased;
(iii) Ex. PW-1/3 is the original death
certificate of the deceased; and
(iv) Ex. PW-1/4 and Ex. PW-1/5 (OS&R)
are the copies of Aadhar Card and PAN card of the deceased.
PW-1 further deposed that besides her, the deceased has left behind one son, namely, Sh. Sandeep Kumar, who has given his no objection to grant of Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner. PW-1 also deposed that she does not know whether the mother of the deceased is alive or expired as she has never seen the mother of the deceased during her entire married life. PW-1 further deposed that she and the deceased had no daughter.
PW-1 also deposed that the deceased was working with IRCON International Ltd. and he has left behind service dues with the said department. PW-1 also deposed that she do not SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 4 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2026.02.11 17:37:46 +0530 know who is Rajni.
9. PW-1 was further recalled and re-examined on 11.02.2026 and she further deposed that she has filed the present petition for grant of succession certificate qua the debts and securities of her deceased husband Mr. Raj Kumar. PW-1 also deposed that she has no objection for grant of succession certificate qua her share in favour of respondent no.2 Mr. Sandeep Kumar in respect of debts and securities of deceased.
10. PW-2, ASI Anil, PS Sarai Rohilla Delhi, brought the summoned record i.e. document relating to the death of deceased, namely Raj Kumar under Section 174 Gr.P.C. vide DD No. GD9A dated 09.11.2019 from PS Sarai Rohilla, Delhi as Ex.PW-2/1. PW-2 further deposed that as per their record, the dead body of the deceased Raj Kumar was handed over to the Sandeep, son of the deceased in the presence of witnesses, namely Manu Dass and Suraj.
11. PW-3, Sh. Ravinder Kumar Shah, Assistant Manager, State Bank of India, Kishan Gani Branch, Delhi-110007, brought the summoned record in respect of saving bank account bearing no. 30494693611 (Sr. Citizen) lying in the joint name of Smt. Kamla Singh and her deceased husband namely Mr. Raj Kumar. PW-3 further deposed that as per record, the said account was opened on 17.09.2008, and he relied upon the certified copy of account opening form and statement of account in respect of said account as Ex. PW-3/2 and Ex.PW-3/3. PW-3 deposed that currently no amount is lying in the said account.
SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 5 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2026.02.11 17:37:50 +0530
12. Respondent no.2/son of the deceased was examined and discharged as RW-1. He deposed that he has no objection for grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioner qua his share in respect of debts and securities of deceased.
RW-1/Respondent no.2 was recalled and re-examined on 11.02.2026. He deposed that earlier he had given no objection for grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioner qua his share in respect of debts and securities of deceased. RW-1 also deposed that now, he wishes to withdraw his earlier no objection and he stated that there is no impediment for grant of succession certificate in his favour qua the debts and securities of deceased. RW-1 further deposed that the death certificate of mother of the deceased i.e. his grandmother Smt. Kaura Devi is now placed on record by respondent no.4 on which he relied upon as Ex.RW-1/1.
13. RW-2, Mr. Praveen Shekhar, Manager (HR), Ircon International Ltd., Saket, New Delhi deposed that the summoned record regarding service dues of Mr. Raj Kumar is already placed on record, as per which, the amount payable towards Gratuity is Rs.9.17.012/-; Leave is Rs. 41,352/-; PF is Rs. 13,01,941/-; PRP is Rs.20,729/-; Funeral Expenses is Rs. 10,000/-; Ex-Gratia is Rs.40,000/-; and Medical Trust Annuity is Rs.15,507/-. RW-2 further deposed that an amount of Rs.28,996/- towards Credit Society is to be recovered and not payable, as such, total amount payable is Rs.24,41,755.30/- as on 12.01.2021. RW-2 relied upon the certified copy of said record as Ex. RW-2/2. RW-2 also brought the employee information record of Mr. Raj Kumar, as SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 6 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2026.02.11 17:37:54 +0530 per which, Mrs. Kamla Devi i.e. petitioner and Master Sandeep Kumar are mentioned as wife and son of the deceased respectively and they are also mentioned as dependents of Mr. Raj Kumar. RW-2 has also brought the LTC claim form for Mr. Raj Kumar, as per which, Mrs. Kamla Devi i.e. petitioner and Master Sandeep Kumar are mentioned as beneficiaries of Mr. Raj Kumar. RW-2 relied upon the copy of said service record and LTC Claim form as Ex.RW-2/3(OSR) and Ex.RW-2/4(OSR) respectively.
14. Respondent no.4/objector was examined and discharged as RW-3. RW-3 deposed that she has settled the matter with the petitioner before Mediation Centre vide settlement agreement dated 09.09.2025 bearing her signatures at point 'A' on each page and in terms of said mediation agreement dated 09.09.2025 and she relied upon the same as Ex.X. RW-3 further deposed that she has received a post dated cheque dated 15.01.2026 bearing no. 944880 for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- in her favour from the petitioner with the assurance that the same shall be honored on its presentation. She relied upon the copy of said cheque as Ex.Y. RW-3 deposed that she has withdrawn the objection filed by her on 01.05.2023. RW-3 further deposed that she has no objection for grant of Succession Certificate either in favour of the petitioner or respondent no.2 in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased Mr. Raj Kumar.
15. RW-4, Ms. Reena Devi, w/o Mr. Anil Kumar, d/o Late Sh. Raj Kumar and Smt. Rajni Devi, r/o Village Ghori, PO Dhabri, Tehsil Barsar, District Hamirpur, Ghowri, Hamirpur, SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 7 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:37:58 +0530 Hamachal Pradesh-176049, deposed that she has settled the matter with petitioner before mediation centre vide settlement agreement dated 09.09.2025 bearing her signatures at point 'b' on each page. She deposed that in terms of vide settlement agreement dated 09.09.2025, her mother (respondent no.4) has received a post dated cheque dated 15.01.2026 bearing no. 944880 for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- in her favour from the petitioner with the assurance that the same shall be honored on its presentation. RW-4 further stated that she has no objection for grant of Succession Certificate either in favour of the petitioner or respondent no.2 in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased Mr. Raj Kumar.
16. The Court has heard submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and has perused the record.
17. Before proceeding further, the law pertaining to grant of succession certificate may be discussed for better understanding of the concept. It is trite that merely by grant of succession certificate, the holder does not become the owner of the estate of the deceased. In this regard, the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.K. Prahalada and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. [MANU/SC/7618/2008, (2008) 15 SCC 577] are relevant to be noted, which are as follows:
"A succession certificate is granted for a limited purpose. A Court granting a succession certificate does not decide the question of title. A nominee or holder of succession certificate has a duty to hand over the property to the person who has a legal title thereto. By obtaining a succession SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 8 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:01 +0530 certificate alone, a person does not become the owner of the property."
18. It is also well settled that the holder of the certificate has a bounden duty to release the debt and securities of the deceased to the rightful claimant under the applicable law. Certain observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Atul Maithel vs. State Bank of India and Ors. [MANU/DE/3548/2017] are set out below:-
"14. As far as the only other contention is concerned, the Court granting the Succession Certificate only issues the certificate to declare to the public at large, of the grantee thereof being entitled, under orders of the Court, to collect the debts and securities of the deceased and to give due discharge therefor. However, if any person holding such debts and securities refuses to return the same to the grantee or disputes debts and securities, the grantee will have to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery thereof and the proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate are by no stretch of imagination, proceedings for recovery or for mandatory injunction.
19. Furthermore, the order granting issuance of the succession certificate does not become executable as decree of the court. It only allows the grantee to receive the debts thereby discharging the debtor of the deceased relieving him from the multiple claims made for such a debt. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in this regard has further held in Sushila Devi Vs. State and Ors. [MANU/DE/3075/2017] that no execution proceedings lie against the debtor of the order passed under such proceedings and holder has to establish his claim independently in a civil suit.
SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 9 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT Date: AGGARWAL 2026.02.11 17:38:05 +0530 The findings of the court were as follows:-
"6. The counsel for the petitioner appears to be under a misconception of law that an order of issuance of Succession Certificate or a Succession Certificate is executable decree against the persons holding the debts and securities of the deceased.
7. A Succession Certificate only entitles the grantee thereof to claim and receive the debts and securities of the deceased, giving a full discharge to the persons who may be holding the said debts and securities, so as to relieve them from claim by multiple persons claiming to be the heirs of the deceased. Before granting such Succession Certificate, in a proceeding for grant of Succession Certificate which in any case is summary in nature, the persons holding debts and securities are not required to be impleaded and a perusal of the order dated 14th November, 2014 ordering issuance of Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner also does not show Axis Bank, Khan Market, New Delhi and New India Insurance Co. Ltd. claimed to be holding the said debts and securities of the deceased to be parties thereto. Merely because an applicant for Succession Certificate has averred in the petition that the debts and securities mentioned in the application are due to the deceased, is no proof of the said debts and securities being due to the deceased and a proceeding for grant of Succession Certificate is not meant for adjudication of the said issues. If the persons who are claimed to be holding the debts and securities of the deceased dispute the claim, the entitlement in law of the grantee of the Succession Certificate is only to make a legal claim against them and not to execute the Succession Certificate or an order SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 10 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:10 +0530 granting Succession Certificate.
9. I find the Supreme Court in Banarsi Dass Vs. Teeku Dutta MANU/SC/0333/2005 :
(2005) 4 SCC 449 to have held (i) that the main object of a Succession Certificate is to facilitate collection of debts on succession and afford protection to parties paying debts to representatives of the deceased person;
(ii) all that the Succession Certificate purports to do is to facilitate the collection of debts, to regulate the administration of succession and to protect persons who deal with the alleged representatives of the deceased persons; (iii) such a Certificate does not give any general power of administration on the estate of the deceased;
(iv) the grant of a certificate does not establish title of the grantee as the heir of the deceased; (v) a Succession Certificate is intended to protect the debtors, which means that where a debtor of a deceased person either voluntarily pays his debt to a person holding a certificate or is compelled by a decree of the Court to pay it to the person, he is lawfully discharged; and, (vi) the grant of a certificate does not establish a title of the grantee as the heir of the deceased, but only furnishes him with authority to collect his debts and allows the debtors to make payments to him without incurring any risk."
20. In the case of Madhvi Amma Bhawani Amma and others Vs. Kunjikutty Pillai Meenakshi Pillai and others. [AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2301=2000 AIR SCW 2432] 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 SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 11 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:13 +0530 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 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 debts. The grant of a certificate to a person does not give him an absolute right to the debts nor does it bar a regular suit for adjustment of the claims of the heir inter se".
21. Thus, to sum up, it can be inferred that the succession certificate ensures that process of release of debt of the deceased is streamlined and the debtor is provided security against numerous claims. The aim of such certificate is that it acts as conclusive proof for discharge of money against the debtor. The court granting the certificate is not required to determine the question of title and the Court by its order granting the certificate merely authorises one to collect the debts or securities of the deceased who then acts as a trustee to distribute the amount to the legal heirs of the deceased. Even though the proceedings for issuance of succession certificate are summary in nature yet, in terms of Rule 3(d) of Part B- Chapter 6- Volume II of the Delhi High Court Rules, the court can take sufficient evidence to enable it to form an opinion as to who is best entitled to the SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 12 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:17 +0530 certificate in respect of the estate of the deceased.
22. Facts of the case shall be analyzed through the prism of legal position enunciated above.
23. As per the testimonies of parties, the deceased died on 09.11.2019 at Delhi. Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 inter-alia provides that when a hindu male dies intestate, his property shall first devolve upon the Class-I legal heirs specified in the Schedule of the Act. Record reveals that mother of the deceased Smt. Kaura Devi has predeceased that deceased on 12.02.1994 as per her death certificate Ex.RW-1/1. PW-1 categorically deposed that the deceased has left behind their son who is respondent no.2 in the present petition. It is pertinent to mention here that the present petition has been vehemently opposed by respondent no.4 and Ms. Reena Devi, alleging themselves to be the legally wedded wife and daughter respectively of the deceased. However, such objections were not pressed by the objector in view of mediation settlement dated 09.09.2025 between the parties. Respondent no.4 and Ms. Reena Devi have given their no objection for grant of succession certificate qua their share in respect of debts and securities of deceased in favour of petitioner or respondent no.2.
24. Petitioner, respondent no.4 and her daughter Ms. Reena Devi have given their no objection for grant of succession certificate qua their share, if any, in respect of debts and securities of deceased in favour of respondent no.2. Accordingly, respondent no.2 shall be entitled to issuance of succession SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 13 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:21 +0530 certificate qua the debts and securities of the deceased. As per the death certificate of the deceased, he used to reside at A-798, Upper Ground First Floor, Shastri Nagar, Delhi-110052, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
25. Succession certificate is sought qua the following securities, left behind by deceased:-
The amount payable towards gratuity is Rs.9,17,012/-; leave is Rs. 41,352/-; PF is Rs. 13,01,941/-; PRP is Rs.20,729/-; Funeral Expenses is Rs. 10,000/-; Ex- Gratia is Rs.40,000/-; and Medical Trust Annuity is Rs.15,507/- maintained with employer of the deceased i.e., Ircon International Limited /respondent no.3 (A govt. of India undertaking), Ministry of Railways.
Total value of securities held by deceased person turns out to be Rs.24,41,755.30/-.
26. In view of the evidence adduced by the petitioner and respondents, the Court is of the considered opinion that there is prima-facie no impediment for grant of Succession Certificate in favour of the respondent no.2 qua the debts and securities of the deceased in terms of Ex.RW-2/2 having total value of Rs.24,41,755.30/-.
Succession Certificate is granted accordingly to the respondent no.2. Succession certificate be drawn on deposit of requisite court fees of Rs.61,043.88/- [Rounded off to Rs.61,044/-] by the respondent no.2 in terms of Article 12 of the SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 14 of 15 Digitally signed by BHARAT AGGARWAL BHARAT AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:24 +0530 Schedule I of Court Fees Act, 1870, as applicable in Delhi and on furnishing an Indemnity Bond and one surety bond within 30 days from today.
Petition is accordingly disposed off. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance. Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date:
2026.02.11 17:38:29 +0530 ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (Bharat Aggarwal) Today i.e. 11.02.2026 ACJ-cum-ARC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi Present judgment consists of 15 pages and each page bears my initials. Digitally signed by BHARAT BHARAT AGGARWAL AGGARWAL Date: 2026.02.11 17:38:32 +0530 (Bharat Aggarwal) ACJ-cum-ARC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi 11.02.2026 (A) SC No. 49/20 Kamla Devi Vs. The State And Ors. Page No. 15 of 15