SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Del) 101

High Court Of Delhi
R.P.SACHDEVA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI - Respondent
PROB.C.P. 55 of 1984
Decided On : 02/27/1985

Advocates Appeared:
ANU GOSVAMY, P.C.Khanna, Reva Khetrapal

The Delhi High Court does not have jurisdiction to grant succession certificate under Part X of the Succession Act, 1925, as it is not the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction for such matters.

Headnote:

SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE - JURISDICTION - S. 371, 372 SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 - S. 5 DELHI HIGH COURT ACT, 1966 - S. 24 PUNJAB COURTS ACT, 1918 - DELHI HIGH COURT IS NOT THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL COURT OF ORIGINAL JURISDICTION FOR GRANTING SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE UNDER PART X OF THE SUCCESSION ACT, 1925.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner filed a petition for grant of succession certificate under Ss. 370/372 of the Succession Act, 1925 in the Delhi High Court. The value of the property in respect of which succession certificate was being claimed was over Rs. 1 lac.

Finding of the Court:

The Delhi High Court does not have jurisdiction to grant succession certificate under Part X of the Succession Act, 1925.

Issues: Whether the Delhi High Court has jurisdiction to grant succession certificate under Part X of the Succession Act, 1925.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Delhi High Court is not the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction for granting succession certificate under Part X of the Succession Act, 1925. 2. S. 5 (2) of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 confers ordinary original civil jurisdiction on the Delhi High Court only in suits where the value exceeds Rs. 1 lac. 3. The jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court is the same as exercised by the High Court of Punjab in Delhi before the constitution of the Delhi High Court, except as provided in S. 5 (2) of the Delhi High Court Act.

Final Decision: The petition for grant of succession certificate was returned to the petitioner for being presented in the Court of competent jurisdiction.

D. P. WADHWA

( 1 ) THIS petition though registered as a probate case is in fact tor grant of a succession certificate in respect of the movables of late Shri R. P. Sachdeva. It has been filed under Ss. 370/372 of the Succession Act, 1925 (for short the Act ) falling under Part X of the Act. Such a petition for grant of succession certificate can be filed in the Court of the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided, as is provided under S. 371 of the Act. "district Judge" under S. 2 (bb) of the Act means the Judge of a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction.

( 2 ) THE question that I have to consider is as to whether the present petition is maintainable in the Delhi High Court. It is not disputed that a petition for grant of succession certificate is not a suit. It is also not disputed that the property in respect of which succession certificate is being claimed values over Rs. 1 lac.

( 3 ) WITH reference to S. 5 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, it was submitted by Mr. P. C. Khanna, Advocate, that the Delhi High Court is a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction and would be included in the definition of the "district Judge". I do not think Mr. Khanna is correct, and I am of the opinion that the present petition is not maintainable in the Delhi High Court.

( 4 ) UNDER S. 24 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918, which is applicable to Delhi, the Court of the District Judge would be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. Under S. 5 ( 1) of the Delhi High Court Act, the Delhi High Court has all such original, appellate and other jurisdiction as was exercisable by the High Court of Punjab in the Union Territory of Delhi Then, there is sub-s. (2) of S. 5, which is as under:

"notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, the High Court of Delhi shall also have in respect of the said territories ordinary original Civil jurisdiction in every suit the value of which exceeds rupees one lakh. "the Delhi High Court has thus ordinary original civil jurisdiction in a suit the value of which exceeds rupees one lac. The present petition obviously does not fall under this category. Could it be said that the Delhi High Court has become the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction because the Delhi High Court has ordinary original jurisdiction in every suit the value of which exceeds a particular limit? If the provisions of S. 24 of the Punjab Courts Act and S. 5 (2) of the Delhi High Court Act are read, it is quite clear that a certain jurisdiction has been taken away from the District Court and conferred on the Delhi High Court and this jurisdiction is only in respect of suits the value of which exceeds rupees one lac. This would not, however, make the Delhi High Court a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in Delhi Reference in this respect may be made to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Bakshi Lochan Singh v. Jathadar Santokh Singh, ILR (1971) 1 Delhi 615 : (AIR 1971 Delhi 277 ). This was a suit under S. 92 of the Civil P. C which was filed in the High Court The question that was raised was that the High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain such a suit It was argued that a suit as authorised by S. 92 of the Code had to be filed in the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction which in Delhi was the Court of the District Judge by reason of S. 24 of the Punjab Courts Act. The Court observed as under (at p. 280):

"full effect has to be given to the language employed in sub-sec. (2) of S. 5 notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force and that can be done only by saying that for purposes of S. 92 of the Civil P. C. the Court of District Judge, Delhi will be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in every suit the value of which does not exceed fifty thousand rupees but in other suits the value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees. this High Court will be the principal Civil Court of origina








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top