SHIV NARAYAN Vs. SATYA NARAYAN
LAWS(RAJ)-2013-12-100
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on December 10,2013

SHIV NARAYAN Appellant
VERSUS
SATYA NARAYAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Bela M. Trivedi, J. - (1.)THE present appeal arises out of the order dt. 18.12.1998 passed by the District & Session Judge, Kota (hereinafter referred to as "the trial Court") in Civil Misc. Case No. 110/92, whereby the trial Court has directed to issue the Succession Certificate in favour of the appellant so far as the FDR of Rs. 8,000/ - was concerned, and to issue the Succession Certificate in respect of the other FDR at State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, Station Road, Kota in favour of the respondent No. 1. The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondent -applicant had filed an application under Sec. 372 of Indian Succession Act 1925 for obtaining the Succession Certificate in respect of the FDRs of his deceased father Mangeram, who had died on 14.09.1990. According to the respondent -applicant, his father had executed a Will in his favour, and therefore, he was entitled to receive the amount of the said FDRs. The appellant also claiming to be the son of the deceased Mangeram, had objected against granting of the Succession Certificate in favour of the respondent. The trial Court, after appreciating the evidence on record, passed the impugned order, which is under challenged before this Court.
(2.)IT has been sought to be submitted by the learned counsel Mr. D.K. Dixit for the appellant that the Will allegedly executed by the deceased Mangeram was a forged Will and the trial Court ought not to have relied upon the same. According to him, the amount of FDR belonged to the appellant because at the relevant time he was serving in the railway and had contributed to the said investment alongwith his father Mangeram. He also submitted that the father of the appellant could not have executed the Will in respect of the FDR's which were invested partly by the appellant. However, the learned counsel Mr. R.P. Vijay, for the respondent No. 1 has submitted that the Will having been duly proved by the respondent by examining the concerned witnesses, the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned order which should not be interfered with.
Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, and to the impugned order passed by the trial Court, it appears that the respondent -applicant had sought for the Succession Certificate in respect of the two FDRs, one of Rs. 8,000/ - and the other of Rs. 20,000/ -, which were in the joint names of Shri Mangeram and the appellant Shiv Narain. The respondent -applicant had claimed the FDRs on the basis of the Will dt. 04.08.1989 allegedly executed by the said Mangeram in his favour. However, the appellant who happened to be the step brother of the respondent had objected against granting of Succession Certificate to the respondent by contending that the FDR's being in the joint names of his father and himself, the respondent -applicant did not have any right therein. It further appears that in the trial Court, the respondent -applicant had duly proved the execution of the Will in question, while examining the concerned witnesses and the trial Court had believed the said Will to be genuine. The trial Court after appreciating the evidence of witnesses including of the appellant, held that the appellant had not stated in his evidence that he had contributed the amount for the investment of FDR of Rs. 20,000/ -. The trial Court therefore considering the Will as genuine, directed to issue Succession Certificate in favour of the respondent, so far as the FDR of Rs. 20,000/ - was concerned, as the said FDR was mentioned in the Will, whereas directed to issue Succession Certificate in respect of the FDR of Rs. 8,000/ - in favour of the appellant, which was not mentioned in the Will. The impugned order passed by the trial Court being just and proper, and the learned counsel for the appellant having failed to point out any illegality or perversity in the same, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the said order. In that view of the matter, the present appeal being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed, and is accordingly dismissed.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.