PRADIP Vs. NIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Heard finally considering the short issue involved.

(2.) The petitioners had moved an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, 'the said Act') for grant of succession certificate. According to the petitioners, the sister of the petitioner nos.1 to 5 and the mother of the petitioner no.6 namely Jyoti Prabhakar Kulkarni expired on 15.05.2011. Since the petitioners as blood relatives of the deceased claim to succeed to the properties left behind by the deceased, they moved the aforesaid application for being issued a succession certificate especially to claim amounts that were deposited in the bank. In those proceedings, the learned Judge of the trial Court just prior to the stage of delivery of judgment directed the petitioners to obtain a heirship certificate so that the claim could be decided on merits. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioners have challenged the same.

(3.) Shri H.R. Gadhia, learned counsel for the petitioners submits by referring to various provisions of Chapter XIII Part X of the said Act that it was not necessary for the petitioners to have obtained a heirship certificate under the Bombay Regulations VIII of 1827 when they had prayed for grant of a succession certificate. He submits that there is a distinction between a succession certificate that is issued under Section 372 read with Section 374 of the said Act and a heirship certificate issued under the Bombay Regulations. It is his submission that a heirship certificate grants limited right of recognition as a legal heir but it confers no right to the property of the deceased. Since the petitioners intended to claim the amounts of the deceased deposited in the bank, obtaining the succession certificate was the only recourse available. Relying upon the decision in Ganpati Vinayak Achwal Versus Nil [2014(6) Mh.L.J. 683], it was submitted that a heirship certificate at the most could grant a formal recognition of the status of a party. Such certificate was not relevant nor was it a pre-condition for seeking a succession certificate. Hence, the trial Court was not justified in directing the petitioners to obtain such heirship certificate while adjudicating the application for grant of succession certificate.