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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J.
S.K. Mittal - Appellant
Versus
NCT of Delhi - Respondent
TEST.CAS. 73 of 2021, I.A. 11466 of 2021 & I.A. 4137 of 2022
Decided On : 04-05-2022




The waiver of inheritance rights requires consideration and a valid transfer instrument; mere expectation to inherit does not suffice.

Headnote:(A) Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Section 218 - Administration of estate - Application for letters of administration for the estate of the deceased, who died intestate. The court questioned the petition’s maintainability due to the presence of Class 1 legal heirs: elder son and younger son. The Petitioner claimed rights based on a settlement deed, but it was held that such deed did not extinguish the legal heirs' rights to the estate. The court emphasized that a mere renunciation of an inheritance expectation, without consideration, is ineffective. Thus, letters of administration cannot be granted to the Petitioner.

Result: Petition dismissed. (Paras 2-14)

Table of Content
1. application for letters of administration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's argument on maintainability. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's analysis of rights and claims under settlement. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. limits of relinquishment of inheritance rights. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. conclusion on petition maintainability. (Para 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--Mr. S. K. Mittal has applied for letters of administration in respect of the estate of his deceased brother - late Shri Rajan Mittal, who passed away intestate on 18th June, 2021.

2. Under Section 218 of the India Succession Act, 1925, if a Hindu person dies intestate, the administration of the estate may be granted to a person who, according to the rules of distribution of the estate applicable in the case of such deceased, would be entitled to whole or any part of the deceased estate. In the instant case, the right to such estate would lie first with the deceased's Class 1 legal heirs. Therefore, at the outset, the Court has queried the counsel regarding the maintainability of the petition at the instance of the Petitioner, when the deceased is survived by Class 1 Legal Heirs i.e., his elder son - Mr. Shrey Mittal [Respondent No. 2] and younger son - Mr. Tushaal Mittal [Respondent No. 3].

3. Counsel for the Petitioner has endeavoured to establish that the instant petition is maintainable, by placing substantial reliance on a Deed of Settlement dated 06th March, 2018 executed between Mr. Rajan Mittal [the deceased, who the "First Party" to the deed] and his wife - Ms. Reshu Mittal [as the "Second Party No. 1"]. In the settlement deed, Respondents No. 2 and 3 were also joined as parties [as "Second Party No. 2 & 3", respectively] and the same, inter alia, records as under:

"5. That the First Party herein became the absolute owner of the Said Property no. B-6/49, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029 and first Party has full right, absolute authority to sell, dispose off and transfer the same in whole or in parts.

6. That now in order to obtain the Decree of Divorce by Mutual Consent the First Party has agreed to execute a Gift Deed in respect of the entire First Floor and Second Floor having land share of 45% beneath these floors and hereinafter referred to as the Gift Property (excluding the Ground Floor, the right to construct basement beneath Ground Floor, terrace or roof rights including the right to construct a Third Floor having land share of 55% beneath these floors, hereinafter referred to as the Said Residual Property) of Property No. B-6/49, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029 in favour of the Second Party No.1 in respect of full and final settlement of all the disputes between the First Party and Second Party collectively (Second Party No. 1, 2 & 3)."

xx ... xx ... xx

"j. That the Second Party No. 2 and the Second Party No.3 agree that the present settlement is full and final settlement for all their claims arising out of birth against the First Party towards any ancestral property, movable or immovable (past, present and future) etc.

k. That the Second Party No.1 agrees that the present settlement is full and final settlement for all the claims of the Second Party No.2 and the Second Party No.3 arising against the First Party towards any ancestral property, movable or immovable (past, present and future) etc.

xx ... xx ... xx

m. That the Second Party collectively further agrees to withdraw the Domestic Violence Case No. 461410/2016 titled as `Reshu Mittal & Other Vs Rajan Mittal' filed before the court of Ms. Niti Phutela, C.M.M., South, Saket Courts, New Delhi subject to the full and final execution of the present Settlement Deed."

4. Counsel for the Petitioner argues that Respondents No. 2 & 3 have waived and relinquished all their rights and claims over any and all properties of the deceased, both present and future, by signing the Settlement Deed, and therefore, only the Petitioner is entitled to Letters of Administration.

5. In the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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