FIRST NATIONAL BANK Vs. SHRI DEVI DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEVI Dayal respondent is a judgment-debtor of the First National Bank Ltd. (in liquidation) (hereinafter referred to AS the bank) to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/and so far nothing has been realised by the bank. The present application has been made by the liquidator alleging that one of the unmarried sons of the judgment-debtor Suresh Kumar Marwah, who was a depositor of the bank, suddenly died and a sum of Rs. 8,553. 30 P. being I the dividend due to this son had since been transferred to the Companies Liquidation Account under Section 5. 55 (i) (a) of the Companies Act, 1956; that under the Hindu Succession Act Devi dayal was the next heir being the father; that Devi Dayal did not apply himself for a succession certificate but his second son Surrinder Kumar Marwah made such an application and the same was granted by the Court after giving notice to the other near relatives and publishing a general citation and that in fact the amount, which is the subject-matter of the succession certificate, belongs to Devi Dayal as the next heir. It was, therefore, prayed that the record of the succession certificate case from Delhi may be summoned and it may be declared that the aforesaid succession certificate will be inoperative so far as the liquidator is concerned, and that, inasmuch an the amount belongs to the judgment-debtor, directions may be issued to the Secretary, Company law Board, to pay the aforesaid amount of dividend to the petitioner bank in part satisfaction of the bank's claim against him. Notice was given both to Devi Dayal and Surrinder Kumar Marwah. Ad interim directions were issued to the Company Law Board not to pay the amount referred to in the petition. After considerable difficulty, both Devi Dayal and Surrinder kumar Marwah were got served. They are represented by Ch. Roop Chand. They filed a joint written statement which, in fact, is not a proper written statement in the eye of law, because the same is neither verified as required nor is supported by an affidavit. It was not denied, however, that Suresh Kumar Marwah had died and that the succession certificate was obtained by Surrinder Kumar Marwah, objection was taken to the jurisdiction of the Court to go into this matter and to declare the certificate as inoperative. The following issues were settledi-

(2.) THE parties agreed that no oral evidence was to be led. The records of the succession certificate case were in the Court and it was agreed that arguments shall be addressed on the basis of the material on that file. From the perusal of the application made in the Court at Delhi for obtaining the succession certificate, it is clear that besides Surinder Kumar Marwah applicant the only other near relations mentioned in paragraph 3 were Devi Dayal father and three sisters of the deceased. It is, however, clear that according to the Schedule to the Hindu succession Act, after the relations mentioned in Class I of which none exists, in class II rather is the most preferential heir and brothers and sisters come next. It is, therefore, clear that Devi Dayal was the next heir of the deceased Suresh kumar Marwah and any amount which was payable to Suresh Kumar Marwah became payable to Devi Dayal as his successor. Now a succession certificate is not a final adjudication of the question as to who is the next heir and as such entitled to the estate of the deceased. Bakhshi Tek Chand J. , in Mt. Charjo v. Dina Nath, air 1937 Lah 196 (2) at p. 198 observed as follows:--

(3.) THE sole question, therefore, is whether this Court has jurisdiction to go into the question whether Devi Dayal is the next heir to the disputed amount which belonged to his son. For that, the learned counsel for the liquidator relied on the provisions of Sections 15-A and 15-B of the Banking Companies Act. The relevant portion of these sections provides as under--