High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
KAMLESH SHARMA,K.C.SOOD
CHHANGI DEVI (THROUGH LRS.) - Appellant
Versus
GENERAL PUBLIC - Respondent
FAO No. 298 of 1995
Decided On : 09/11/2000
Succession Certificate - Indian Succession Act - Section 372, Section 373, Section 377, Section 383, Section 384 - The court discussed the grant of succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, specifically focusing on the entitlement of the applicant to a share of the deceased's bank deposits, the refusal to grant the certificate due to withdrawal of funds, and the maintainability of the appeal. The court emphasized that the proceedings under the Act do not determine the right of the party to the estate of the deceased and that the grant of succession certificate merely entitles the holder to realize the debts of the deceased and give a valid discharge. The court also held that the proceedings for the grant of succession certificate lapse on the death of an applicant and legal heirs of such applicant cannot be substituted to continue the proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
Chhangi Devi filed an application for grant of Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for the debts due to deceased Sant Ram. The District Judge declined to grant the certificate, and Chhangi Devi appealed, claiming entitlement to a share of the bank deposits left by Sant Ram.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Chhangi Devi was entitled to a share of the bank deposits but refused to grant the succession certificate due to the withdrawal of funds by her son, which left no amount due to Chhangi Devi for the certificate to be issued in her favor. The court also addressed the maintainability of the appeal and held it to be valid.
Issues: The issues included the entitlement of Chhangi Devi to a share of the bank deposits, the refusal to grant the succession certificate, and the maintainability of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the proceedings under the Act do not determine the right of the party to the estate of the deceased and that the grant of succession certificate merely entitles the holder to realize the debts of the deceased and give a valid discharge. The court also held that the proceedings for the grant of succession certificate lapse on the death of an applicant and legal heirs of such applicant cannot be substituted to continue the proceedings.
Final Decision: The court held that the proceedings started by Chhangi Devi for the grant of succession certificate lapse on her death and that a succession certificate in respect of the debts and securities of late Sant Ram can be granted to another person who may be found entitled to such certificate by fresh proceedings. The appeal was accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
Kuldip Chand Sood, J.—Chhangi Devi, original appellant, filed an application No.l-S/2 of 1993, before the District Judge, Solan, for grant of Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, hereinafter referred to as The Act, for the debts due to deceased Sant Ram, son of the applicant, lying with the State Bank of India, Solan in terms of the following accounts : (a) Saving Bank Account No.46/15805 for Rs.8587.82 paise; (b) Saving Bank Account No. 1543 for rupees 48,143.45 paise; (c) Fixed Deposit Receipt No.338774 for rupees 75,000/-. Total Rs. 1,31,670/-. The District Judge declined to grant the certificate. Dis-satisfied, Chhangi Devi preferred this appeal.
2. In order to appreciate the controversy, facts for the purpose of disposal of this appeal may be noticed thus: Sant Ram died intestate leaving behind his widow Shanti Devi, respondent No.2, daughter Ms. Neelam respondent No.3, mother Smt. Chhangi Devi, (appellant-applicant) and a son Sunder Singh who died before the filing of the application for the grant of succession certificate. The application was contested by the respondents on grounds, inter alia : (i) Applicant is not mother of Sant Ram; (ii) Sant Ram had executed a will which is in possession of Liaq Ram; (iii) Applicant Chhangi, in collusion with her son Liaq Ram taking undue advantage of the minority of respondent Neelam withdrew Rs.40,000/~ from the account of Sant Ram four or five days after his death and that rupees 40,000/- is liable to be adjusted towards the share of Chhangi Devi if she is found to be entitled to the debts mentioned in the application.
3. Learned trial Judge settled the following issues:
1. Whether the applicant Smt. Chhangi Devi is entitled to l/4th share of the bank deposit in question, which has been left behind her son deceased-Sant Ram?
2. Relief.
4. Learned trial Judge found applicant to be entitled to l/4th share out of the total amount of rupees 1,31,670/- mentioned in the application which comes to less than rupees 40,000/-. She also found that the applicant, through her son Liaq Ram, had already withdrawn rupees 40,000/- immediately after the death of Sant Ram. The trial Judge therefore held that as nothing remains to be paid to the applicant, therefore, succession certificate cannot be issued in favour of Chhangi Devi.
5. During the pendency of the appeal, Smt. Chhangi Devi died on May, 15, 1998. She was substituted by her legal representatives, present appellants No. 1 to 5 by the orders of this Court dated December 28,1998. It may also be noticed that Smt. Shanti Devi, respondent No.2 is mentally retarded and is represented by her daughter Ms. Neelam, respondent No.4.
6. The contention of the appellant is that the District Judge has illegally held that amount of rupees 40,000/- withdrawn by Liaq Ram son of Chhangi Devi appellant, on the basis of a cheque issued by deceased Sant Ram, is liable to be adjusted against the l/4th share of Chhangi Devi. It is the further contention of the appellant that once the appellant is held to be entitled to the grant of succession certificate, the same cannot be fettered by extraneous consideration and that appellant ought to have been granted the succession certificate in respect of all the deposits mentioned in the application.
7. We have heard Mr. K.D. Sood, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. G.D. Verma, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents and gone through the record.
8. The contention of Shri Verma is two-fold: (a) The present appeal is not maintainable; (b) On the death of Chhangi Devi, the proceedings comes to end and certificate cannot be granted on the basis of the application filed by Chhangi Devi to any other person. Maintainability of appeal
9. So far the maintainability of the appeal is concerned, Part X of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, deals with the grant of Succession Certificates. Section 372 of the Act deals with the application for the grant of the Certificate. Section 373 provides
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.