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

1988 Supreme(Ori) 123

High Court Of Orissa
S. C. MOHAPATRA
BRANCH MANAGER, S.B.I., PURI - Appellant
Versus
SATYABAN PATHAL - Respondent
First Appeal 270  Of  1978
Decided On : 08/30/1988

Advocates Appeared:
A.S.Naidu, DAITARI KAR, P.K.MISHRA, P.MOHANTY, S.N.SINHA

Pledged gold ornaments are not 'securities' or 'debts' under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and therefore, a succession certificate or letters of administration is not required for their redemption. However, the Bank can protect its interests by obtaining an indemnity bond from the legal representatives.

Headnote:

SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE - PLEDGED GOLD ORNAMENTS - NOT DEBTS - NO REQUIREMENT FOR SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE OR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION - BANK CAN PROTECT ITSELF BY OBTAINING AN INDEMNITY BOND.

Fact of the Case:

Plaintiffs, the legal heirs of a deceased Hindu, sought to redeem gold ornaments pledged to the State Bank of India by the deceased. The Bank demanded a succession certificate or letters of administration, citing a circular issued by it. The plaintiffs filed a suit challenging the Bank's demand.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the pledged gold ornaments were not 'securities' or 'debts' as defined under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and therefore, a succession certificate was not required. It also held that letters of administration were not necessary for the plaintiffs to redeem the ornaments, as they were the legal representatives of the deceased Hindu.

Issues: 1. Whether a succession certificate or letters of administration is required to redeem pledged gold ornaments from a bank. 2. Whether the Bank's circular demanding such documents is legally binding.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the definition of 'security' and 'debt' under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, and concluded that pledged gold ornaments did not fall within these categories. 2. The court held that Section 212(2) of the Act excludes the property of a Hindu dying intestate from the requirement of letters of administration. 3. The court recognized the Bank's need for caution but emphasized that it could protect itself by obtaining an indemnity bond from the legal representatives.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the Bank's appeal and upheld the trial court's decree, allowing the plaintiffs to redeem the pledged ornaments upon payment of dues and execution of an indemnity bond in favor of the Bank.

S. C. MOHAPATRA, J.


( 1 ) DEFENDANT No. 3, the Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Puri Branch is the appellant.

( 2 ) DECEASED Sanatan Pathal took loan from State Bank of India and as security pledged some gold ornaments. Shortly thereafter, Sanathan having expired, plaintiff 1, the eldest son approached the State Bank of India for release of the gold ornaments pledged on receipt of the amount due on the loan advanced from him. State Bank of India had no objection to release the pledged articles on receipt of the dues provided that the successors produce letters of administration or a succession certificate, as the case may be. This in short, is the grievance of the plaintiffs.

( 3 ) DEMAND for production of a legal representation in the form of letters of administration by the State Bank of India is supported by a circular issued by it for guidance of its officers which has been proved and marked as Ext. B. in the suit. Relevant portion is extracted below: - "ii. APPROPRIATE FORM OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION 3. Where a Hindu depositor with the Bank of goods and moveable property either by way of pledge or in safe deposit locker or safe custody dies intestate that is, without leaving behind a will, the claimant has to produce legal representation in the form of letters of administration to the estate of the deceased and this is indisputably the appropriate form. Where, however, the goods and moveable property are 'securities' as defined in the Indian Succession Act, a succession certificate covering the securities would also be the appropriate form. "

( 4 ) TRIAL Court decreed the suit on the finding that Circular No. 5 of 1977 (Ext. B) is not a statutory document to bind the plaintiff. It distinguished the decision reported in AIR 1942 Lah 173 (FB) (Sri Ram v. Collector, Lahore), which relates to letters of administration in respect of shares and held that S. 212 of the Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') having made a clear provision that letters of administration is not necessary in the case of a Hindu, the defendants are not justified to claim production of letters of administration for releasing the gold ornaments.

( 5 ) THERE is no dispute that Sanatan, a Hindu governed under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 died intestate leaving behind the plaintiffs as his sole heirs and legal representatives. He had deposited with the State Bank of India, Puri Branch gold ornaments by way of pledge. With these admitted facts, short question for consideration is whether letters of administration or a succession certificate is required to be obtained by the legal representatives to get back the gold ornaments on payment of dues to the Bank ?

( 6 ) SUCCESSION Certificate is granted on an application under S. 372 of Indian Succession Act, in respect of debt or security. A succession certificate specifies the debts and securities as per the application. The effect of the certificate as is provided under S. 381 of the Act is that it shall be conclusive as against the persons owing such debts or liable for such securities which afford full indemnity to such persons as regards all payments made or dealings had in good faith in respect of such debts or securities to or with the person to whom the certificate is granted. The purpose of succession certificate is thus, to grant indemnity to the person who owes the debts or is liable on the securities to pay the debt to the person who gets the certificate or deals with that person with regard to the security.

( 7 ) SECURITY has been defined in S. 370 (2 ). It reads as follows :- "for the purpose of this Part, "security" means- (a) any promissory note, debenture, stock or other security of the Central Government or of a State Government; (b) any bond, debenture, or annuity charged by Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom on the revenues of India; (c) any stock or debenture of, or share in, a company or other incorporated institution; (d) any debenture or other security f








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