Delhi District Court
Laxmi Devi And Ors vs State And Ors on 5 September, 2024
IN THE COURT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL JUDGE-
CUM- ADDITIONAL RENT CONTROLLER (CENTRAL) :
DELHI
Presided over by : Ms. Medha Arya
Petition No. : SC/39/2023.
CIS No. DLCT03-001158-2023.
In the matter of:-
1. Smt. Laxmi Devi,
W/o. Late Sh. Ramesh,
2. Sh. Rahul,
S/o. Late Sh. Ramesh
3. Sh. Sandeep,
S/o. Late Sh. Ramesh
4. Ms. Sandhya,
S/o. Late Sh. Ramesh
5. Sh. Sumit,
S/o. Late Sh. Ramesh
All resident of
House No. 135,T-Huts & Qtrs.,
Old Chandrawal,
Khyber Pass, Civil Lines,
Central Delhi,
Delhi-110054.
....Petitioners.
Versus
1. The State
2. Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Through its Commissioner,
Civic Centre, Minto Road,
Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Marg,
SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr.
New Delhi-110002.
.....Respondents.
Date of Institution : 28.02.2023
Date of order when reserved : N.A.
Date of order when announced : 05.09.2024
JUDGMENT:
1. Present succession petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of debts and securities of deceased Sh. Ramesh S/o. Late Sh. Suka Ram (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased').
2. It is averred that the deceased died intestate on 13.05.2021 at Delhi. It is stated that the deceased was the ordinary resident of H. No. 135, Old Chandrawal, Civil Lines, Delhi-110054, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court. It is further stated that deceased is survived by five legal heirs i.e. petitioner No. 1, being his wife, and petitioners No. 2 to 5, being his children.
3. It is averred that deceased has left behind debts and securities, the details of which are mentioned in annexure-B of the petition. In the petition, petitioners have prayed for grant of succession certificate in respect of aforesaid debts and securities.
4. State has been impleaded as a respondent.
SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr.
5. After filing of this petition, notice was given to the general public by way of publication in the newspaper "The Statesman" dated 10.08.2024, but none appeared from general public to oppose or contest the present petition.
6. During summary enquiry, 06 witnesses were examined.
7. Petitioner No. 2 took the witness stand as PW-1. PW-1 deposed that he has no objection to grant of succession certificate in favour of petitioner no. 1 in respect of the debts and securities of the deceased which are the subject matter of the present petition.
8. Petitioner No. 1 took the witness stand as PW-2. PW-2 deposed that deceased was her husband, and he died intestate on 13.05.2021 at Delhi. PW-2 deposed that deceased had married one Vimlesh and got divorced on 11.08.1997. PW-2 deposed that after that she married the deceased on 12.02.2000. PW-2 deposed that four children were born out of the wedlock of deceased with his first wife, but no child was born from her wedlock with the deceased. PW-2 deposed that mother of deceased predeceased the deceased. PW-2 deposed that deceased was working with MCD and has left behind service dues. PW-2 deposed that deceased was residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. PW-2 relied upon the following documents in her testimony :-
(i) Ex. PW-2/1 being death certificate of the SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr.
deceased.
(ii) Mark-A is the copy of judgment dated
11.08.1997.
(iii) Ex. PW-2/2 being copy of Aadhar Card.
She was not cross-examined despite opportunity.
9. Testimonies of petitioners no. 3 to 5 namely Sh. Sandeep, Ms. Sandhya and Sh. Sumit were recorded as PW-3 to PW-5 respectively. They testified that they have no objection to grant of Succession Certificate in favour of petitioner No. 1 qua debts and securities of the deceased which are the subject matter of the present petition.
10. RW-1 Sh. Daniel Joseph, A.S. Inspector, MCD, Civil Lines Zone, Delhi brought on record the certified copy of letter with regard to service dues of Sh. Ramesh (Ex-Driver). As per record being Ex. RW-1/2, an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- is due towards Gratuity; Rs.12,21,194/- is due towards GPF; Rs.4,34,564/- is due towards Leave Encashment; Rs.60,000/- is due towards DLI and Rs.30,000/- is due towards GIS amount. RW-1 deposed that as per record, Rs.36,416/- is also due to the deceased towards pension.
11. The Court has heard submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and has perused the record.
12. It is no longer res integra that succession petitions are to be decided summarily. Sec. 373 of the Indian Succession Act SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. provides that a succession petition is to be decided in a summary manner and even if court cannot decide the right to the certificate without determining questions of law or fact which may seem to be too complicated and difficult for determination in a summary proceedings, the Court may nevertheless grant a certificate to a person if he appears to be the person having prima facie the best title thereto. Thus U/s. 373 of Indian Succession Act, only prima facie case is to be seen and other questions of law and fact which may be complicated are to be decided by a regular civil court.
13. In the case of Madhvi Amma Bhawani Amma and others Vs. Kunjikutty Pillai Meenakshi Pillai and others, Respondents. 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 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 time barred, 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.
SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. 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".
14. Facts of the case shall be analyzed through the prism of legal position enunciated above.
15. From the uncontroverted testimony of PW-1, it stands established that the deceased died intestate. Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 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. Mother of deceased predeceased him. Widow, sons and daughter of the deceased are surviving class-I legal heirs of the deceased. As such, petitioners No. 1 to 5 are entitled to succeed to the debts and securities of the deceased simultaneously and equally. Petitioners No. 2 to 5 have given their no objection to grant of Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner No. 1. Thus, petitioner No. 1 is entitled to succeed to the securities of deceased. As per death certificate of deceased, he used to reside at H. No. 135, Old Chandrawal, Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of this Court.
16. Succession certificate has been sought by the petitioners with respect to the service dues of the deceased, including pension. However, succession certificate cannot be granted for pension. It is a well settled position of law that succession certificate cannot be granted for pension, since pension is neither a debt nor security and does not form part of SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. estate of the deceased. It is a contingency benefit, the right to which accrues on the death of the deceased while he is in service, which is a qualifying event due to which monetary benefits accrue to the dependents of the deceased. Placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi titled as Deputy Director (Horticulture) Vs. Premwati & Ors. (delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Gauba) (order dated 19.04.2018) (C.R.P. No. 85/2017 & CM Nos. 13031-32/17) , this Court is of the view that the right to pension cannot be the subject matter of the proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate.
17. Succession certificate is sought qua following service dues with MCD, left behind by deceased :-
(1) Gratuity : Rs.20,00,000/-
(2) GPF : Rs.12,21,194/-
(3) Leave : Rs.04,34,564/-
Encashment
(4) DLI : Rs.60,000/-
(5) GIS Amount : Rs.30,000/-
Total value of securities held by deceased is Rs.37,45,758/-.
18. In view of the evidence adduced on record, the Court is of the considered opinion that there is prima-facie no impediment for grant of Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner no. 1 in the debts and securities of deceased in terms of Ex. RW-1/2 having total amount of Rs.37,45,758/-. Succession Certificate granted accordingly. Succession SC/39/2023 Laxmi Devi & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. certificate be drawn on deposit of requisite court fee of Rs.93,643.95p (Rounded of Rs.93,644/-) in terms of Article 12 Schedule 1 of Court Fees Act, 1870, as applicable in Delhi and on furnishing an Indemnity Bond with one surety within 30 days from today.
Petition is accordingly disposed of.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Digitally
signed by
Medha Medha Arya
Date:
Arya 2024.09.06
16:28:42
+0530
Announced in the open (MEDHA ARYA)
court on 05.09.2024. Administrative Civil Judge-cum-
Additional Rent Controller (Central) Delhi.