A succession certificate, strictly speaking, does not effect adjudication of title of the deceased far less than that of the holder as regards the debts and securities covered thereunder. Yet, simply to afford protection to the parties paying the debts. The grant of succession certificate is conclusive against the debtor. A succession certificate is effect throughout the whole India as per section 380 of The Indian Succession Act,1925 (herein after referred as the Act). According to sections 381 and 386 of the Act, a succession certificate is conclusive as against the person/persons liable to whom full indemnity is afforded (make available) for payments made. But, despite the succession certificate is only conclusive of the representative title of the holder thereof as against the debtors, a suit of declaration will not lie that the holder of the certificate is not the legal representative of the deceased.
What does the word '' Succession'' mean?
'' The law and procedures under which beneficiaries become entitled to property under a testator's will or on intestacy.''
Grant of Succession Certificate- Certain Restrictions:
Under the following circumstances, no succession certificate can be granted.
i) under section 370 (1) of the Act, as to any debt or security to which a right is required to be established by probate or letters of administration;
ii) that too, if sections 212 of the Act applies;
iii) if section 213 of the Act applies;
iv) that is to say that where law requires probates or letters of administration as mandatory to establish right to property as in the cases of Parsis, Jews, East Indians, Europeans and Americans.
v) Provided that nothing will prevent as to granting a succession certificate to any person entitle to the effects of a deceased Indian Christian or any part thereto pertaining to any debt or security, that the right can be established by letters of administration.
What does the word ''SECURITY'' mean under the purview of Succession Certificate?
A fortiori, it is very essential to know the word '' Security'' means, any bond, debenture, promissory note, any stock or debenture of , or share in , a company , any debenture or other security for money issued by or on behalf of a local authority, that too, any other security which the Governor -General in Council may declare to be security for the purpose of succession certificate, any annuity charged by Act of Parliament on the revenues of India etc.
How to apply for ''Succession Certificate''?:
i) An application should be made to The District Judge under section 372 of the Act;
ii) the petitioner must sign and verify the petition;
iii) the residences of the relatives and family of the deceased must be mentioned;
iv) In case of The Hindu Succession Act (Act XXX OF 1956), the names of the heirs must be mentioned in the petition;
v) the right of the petitioner should be mentioned;
vi) Either Ordinary residence of the deceased, at the time of death, or the property of the deceased should be within the limits of the Jurisdiction of the Court concerned;
vii) the debts and securities as to which the succession certificate is applied for should be mentioned;
viii) the absence of any impediment u/sec. Sub section (1) of Section 370 of the Act or any other provisions of the Act or any other enactments to the grant of succession certificate or to the validity of it in case of it was granted, must be mentioned.
Effect of Succession Certificate:
To know the effect of succession certificate, it is apt to see section 381 of the Act. The succession certificate simply affords protection to the parties paying debts. It is thus cleat that there is absolutely no adjudication of title of the deceased.
In the case of Muthia vs Ramnatham, 1918 MWN 242, it was held that the grant of certificate gives to the grantee a title to recover the debt due to the deceased, and payment to the grantee is a good discharge of the debt.'' In the case of Srinivasa vs Gopalan, , it was held that '' The question whether the debt belonged to the deceased is not a matter to be decided on an application for a succession Certificate.'' In the case of Paramananda Chary vs Veerappan, AIR 1928 Madras 213: 82 IC 604, it was held that ''The grant of succession certificate is conclusive against the debtor. Even if another person turns out to be the heir of the deceased, it does not follow that the certificate is invalid.'' In the case of Ganga Prasad vs Saudan , it was observed that section 381 of the Act protects the debtors and affords full indemnity to the persons liable to pay the debts and in respect of the securities covered by hte certificate as persons having the same paid in ''good faith''.
No Addition Yet Extension of Succession Certificate:
Section 376 of the Act provides that the succession certificate can be extended in respect of any debt or security not originally specified therein and if such extension is ordered, it shall have the same effect as if the debt or security to which the succession certificate is extended had been originally specified. The District Judge can extend a succession certificate only on the application of the holder of a succession certificate and not of any other person.
Relevant Case-Law As To Succession Certificate:
1. Paramananda chary V. Veerappan
2. Meebatcgu V. Ananthanarayana 26 Mad 224 (229);
3. Sithambaravadiva Vs. Thirupalkadanaha AIR 1928 Mad. 56 (57)
4. Shev Shetty V. Jamna Bai AIR 1956 Hyd. 59.
5. Oriential G.S. Life Assurance V. Vanteddu 35 Mad 162 (167)
6. Anjanaiah Vs. Nagappa AIR 1967 AP 61
7. Muthia V. Ramanatham 1981 M/wN 242l 43 I/c 972 (973) Sharafat V. Khurshed 49 IC 958.
8. Peari Lal Vs, Jahbba Lal AIR 1925 All 66 (67): 82 IC 604
9. Mehr Chand V. Syed Muhammad 99 PR 1899
10. Sahib Ram V. Muhammad 29 PR 1899;
11. Charusila V. Jyotish 33 IC 157 (159)
12. Keshavji Lakhamshey V. Janji Deoji AIR 1950 Kut. 49
13. Mohammed Abdul Vs. Sarifan 16 CWN 231 (233L 12 IC 593L 15 CLJ 384
14. Ram Saran V. Goppu 71 PWR 1916: 33 IC 603 (604)
15. Jigri Begum Vs. Syed Ali 5 CWN 494 (497)
16. Mohabir Vs. Lala Baldeo 1 IC 205 (206)
17. Bai Jasgu Vs, Parbhu 28 Bom 119 (123)
18. Golam Khalik V. Tasaddak 28 CLJ 299: 890 (892)
19. S.C. Guha Vs. J.C. Das AIR 1970 Assam 102
20. Rupan V. Bhaelu 36 All 423 (424): 25 IC. 320
21. Ganpaya V. Krishnappa 26 Bom LR. 491: 80 IC 422: AIR. 1924 Bom 394, 270
22. Ramji V. Firm Mangal Sen AIR 1954 Pepsu 66
23. Ramu singh Vs. Aghori Singh AIR 1938 Pat. 68.
24. Assam Bengal Rly. Co. V. Atul Chandra AIR 1937 Cal.314
25. Shyam Sundari V. Sarti Devi AIR 1962 Pat 220.
26. Kuchu Iyer V. Vengu Ammal AIR 1926 Mad 407 (408) following Parshotam Vs. Ranchod 8 BHCR AC 152 (FB)
27. Kasumari V. Makku AIR 1927 All 227 (228) ; following Fateh Chand V. Md. Baksh 16 All 259 (266) (FB)
28. Manasing V. Amad Kunchi 17 Mad 14 (16)
29. Annappurnabai V. Lakshman 19 Bom 145 (148)
30. Biro Devi V. Sardar Singh 1989 PLJR 1028
31. P.A.Biju V. Director 1989 (2) KLJ 247.
32. Brij Bihari V. Jijai Shankar AIR 1991 All 236.
33. Venkateswarlu V. Brahamaravulu 25 Mad 634 (635)
34. Radha Raman V. Gopal 27 CWN 947 (distinguishing 25 Mad 634)
35. Shitab Debi Vs. Debi Prasad 16 All 21 (22)
36. Sharifunnisa V. Masum Ali, Ibid.
37. AIR 1950 Cal 578: 85 CLJ 126
38. Bindo V. Radhe Lal 42 All 512 (513): 56 IC 181
39. Sharifunnissa V. Masum Ali 42 All 347 (350): 56 IC 380
40. Mancharam V. Kalidas 19 Bom 821 (825)
41. Ahamad Ebrahim V. Govt. of Bombay ILR (1943) Bom 25: 44 Bom LR 912; AIR 1943 Bom 50, relied on in Mulukh Raj V. Raj Narain AIR 1957 Cal 687; 61 CWN 621,
42. Singeshwar Prasad V. Suraj Bai AIR 1952 Pat . 142.
43. Sonua Kumhar Vs. Chamtu Pahan AIR 1953 Pat 134.
44. Kanhaiya V. Kanhaiya Lal 46 All 372 (374): 22 ALJ 345: AIR 1924 All 376: 79 IC 363.
45. Nanhu V. Gulabo 26 All 172(175) (dissenting from 20 Mad 442: 5 MLJ 28 and 25 Cal 320); Kunjunni V. Kongathi 7 MLT 246: 1910 MWN 265L 6 IC 599; Bai Devkore V. Lalchand 19 Bom 790 (793); DilajV. Jagdat 5 OC 213 (215) (following 19 Mad 1999):Bhagwani V. Manni Lal 13 All 214; In re Paddo Sundari 3 All 304; Jasoda V. Sujanmal 63 IC 846 (Nag).
46. Ramareddi V. Papi Reddi 19 Mad 199 (200)
47. Radha Rani V. Brindaban 25 Cal 320 (321) (dissenting from 13 All; 214); Ariya V. Thangammal 20 Mad 442; Biri V. Barkhurdar 4 PLR 1908: 139 PR 1908.
48. Rai Nandkore V. Magan Lal 36 Bom 272 (273): 13 Bom LR 1208: 12 IC 921.
49. Rangubai V. Abaji 19 Bom 399; Jevermal V. Nazir 18 Bom 748
50. Gurvaraya V.Chandra Sekhar 31 Mad 362.
51. Ram Ghulam V. Shib Din 1892 AWN 35,
52. Banbee Madhab V. Nilambar 7 WR 376
53. Rajmohinee V. Dinobando 17 WR 566.
54. Huran V. Hingan 34 All 148 (149) ; 12 IC 926 : 8 ALJ 1300.
55. Sukhia V. Secretary of State 19 CWN 551 (552) l
56. Nagavur V. Hau Ran 2 Kag KH 312;
57. Basti Begam V Saulat 16 OC 197: 21 IC 388:
58. Jagam Das V. Mangal Das 41 IC 640 ;
59. Bhanwar Bai V. Balmukund AIR 1960 Raj 9.
60. Tikaya V. Launga 124 PR 1890.
I hope that this information given supra is helpful to judicial officers, lawyers, law students and others who seek information as to '' Succession Certificate.
# Oxford Dictionary of Law, Third Edition, page388
# 20 MLJ 865
# AIR 1952 A 80
| Posted by santosh on June 30, 2013
my fater thretend me that as per supreme court verdidct,daughter have
share in his property so if we do not obey his all wrong & right ,he
will give all share to my three married sisters.so kindly guide me what
to do in that situation.althogh the house which he possess was build by
my earnings.apart,i also give him money to run home since 2003 when i
got service till now.
| Posted by Amruta Ghatge on October 19, 2012
Sir,my papa had make two marraiges, mom is second wife & first wife is
mom sister she is my massi. now before 3 yrs papa ia no more.. now my
dad property is there.. but my first mom is said me tht u dont get any
money. Sir my mom is blind i m only one child to my mom. now i m doning
job having 4000 payment. we dont our own home also.... Sir my finanacial
condition is bad.. can my mom legally get the right to have the dad
property.( kya mere mom ko legally uska hissa mil sakta hai) wht shoud i
Sir i dont have supports of anyone... I cant manage the fees os lawyer..
sir give me suggestion wht should I do.
This Article focuses on the most controversial rule of interpretation – the doctrine of purposive construction. Whether this rule can be universally applied? How far a court can go in interpreting a statute? Whether they can correctly go behind the motives of the drafters of legislation?
| » Total Articles
| » Total Authors
| » Total Views
| » Total categories