The imposition of a security bond for a Succession Certificate is discretionary and not mandatory, particularly when there are no other claimants.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.

1. Heard Sri R.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rama Shanker Yadav, learned counsel for the sole-respondent.

2. This petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

"i) To set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 18.1.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kanpur Nagar in Succession Case No.255/70/2022 (CNR No. UP KN05-0010902022) Smt. Alka Singhania Vs. Smt. Shilpi Agarwal upto extent by which the security bond to the guaranty like amount of the Succession Certificate has been directed to be submitted by the plaintiff/petitioner (Annexure No.6 to this petition).

ii) To direct the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Kanpur Nagar to issue Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner after taking personal bond of the plaintiff/petitioner and exempt the petitioner to submit Security/Bond for grant of succession certificate."

3. Brief facts of the case are that one Smt. Shakuntala Devi, wife of late Nawal Kishore Tulsiyani, R/o 55/50 Generalganj, Kanpur Nagar, died on 30.10.2008, leaving behind the petitioner and respondent (both daughters of Smt. Shakuntala Devi), as her legal heirs and successors. Smt. Shakuntala Devi died intestate. Late Smt. Shakuntala Devi (mother of petitioner and respondent), has shares of Reliance Industries Limited in which she was the recorded owner. Being daughters and the legal heirs and successors of late Smt. Shakuntala Devi, both the petitioner and respondent are entitled to have received all the property of their mother and there is no other legal heir and successor of late Smt. Shakuntala Devi. Plaintiff-petitioner filed a case under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act with a prayer to issue succession certificate in her favour, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 255/70/2022, Smt. Alka Singhania vs. Smt. Shilpi Agarwal. After the notice and publication in the newspapers, no objections were filed by anyone. The defendant, Shilpi Agarwal, appeared in the case and filed her consent along with affidavit dated 18.08.2022 stating therein that succession certificate be granted to the plaintiff. The Civil Judge, by order dated 18.01.2025, allowed the application filed by the petitioner and directed to issue succession certificate in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner with a rider that plaintiff- petitioner shall furnish a security bond and a personal bond for the amount for which succession certificate was being granted. Being aggrieved with the imposition of condition of furnishing security bond, the present petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has already submitted a personal bond/undertaking before the court below in compliance of order dated 18.01.2025 on 18.08.2025. Copy of the same has been annexed along with supplementary affidavit being Annexure No. SA-1.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent, Sri Rama Shanker Yadav, has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of Shilpi Agarwal, the sole defendant/respondent, admitting the claim of the plaintiff and mentioning therein that she had no objection in case succession certificate is granted to the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that imposition of a condition to submit security bond of the equal amount is arbitrary, especially when there are no other claimants/ heirs of the deceased and the only other heir of the deceased, namely, Shilpi Agarwal, the defendant/respondent has no objection in case succession certificate is issued to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Delhi High Court in case of Arvind Nanda