GAYATRI AGGARWAL Vs. INCOME TAX COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAO No. 183 of 2017 and

(2.) It is noted that the trial court has dismissed the petition by observing that the appellant/petitioner/wife failed to prove that the deceased Sh. Somesh Aggarwal was the sole proprietor of M/s Yash International as no such documents were filed and also because the appellant/petitioner failed to prove that she was the wife of the deceased. In this Court the appellant/petitioner has therefore filed an application under Order 41, Rule 27 Civil P.C. supported by her fresh affidavit by way of evidence in which the appellant/petitioner has proved various documents being the aadhar card, election identity card, passport of the appellant/petitioner, documents of Department of Value Added Tax of Government of NCT of Delhi, and all of which documents in my opinion clearly show that not only the appellant/petitioner is the widow of late Sh. Somesh Aggarwal but also that Sh. Somesh Aggarwal was in fact the proprietor of M/s Yash International.

(3.) In my opinion the trial court should not take such harsh view in uncontested cases as it has taken by the impugned judgment in dismissing a petition seeking succession certificate especially where other legal heirs have given their no objections to grant of the succession certificate. If the trial court found that for some reason the relevant documents were not filed on behalf of the appellant/petitioner showing her relationship with the deceased or how the deceased was the proprietor of M/s Yash International, then, surely in the interest of justice before dismissing the petition seeking succession certificate, the trial court could have pointed out this fact to the appellant/petitioner and have given an opportunity to the appellant/petitioner to remedy the defects. This was however not done by the trial court.