S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1162/1997 Charitra Devi Vs. Jyoti and ors. Dated : 28.09.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. Muneesh Sharma for the appellant. None present for the respondents. *** Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 17th September, 1997 whereby the learned Additional District Judge, Behrod, District Alwar issued a succession certificate in favour of the non-petitioners namely Jyoti, Pinki and Rekha through their mother Vidya Devi W/o Hari Prasad. 2. The facts of the case succinctly are thus: That on 16th August, 1996 Smt. Vidya Devi on behalf of their minor daughters Jyoti, Pinki and Rekha filed an application in the Court of Additional District Judge, Behrod under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1955 on the ground that the late Shri Deendayal S/o Shri Ramswaroop Jangid Bhrahmin, r/o Partapur Tehsil Behrod died on 27th September, 1989. Vidya Devi happened to be his legally wedded wife. Out of their wedlock, three daughters namely Jyoti, Pinki and Rekha were born. Late Deendayal had one account in Post Office Partapur. Vidya Devi endeavoured to withdraw the money lying in Account No.72391 of Post Office Partapur, but the authorities refused to do so in the absence of -2- succession certificate. The petitioners respondents produced witnesses namely Vidya Devi, Dulichand, Jainarain and Banwari in support of their application. The learned Additional Sessions Judge issued succession certificate in favour of the respondents as indicated hereinabove. 3. None is present for the respondents. Hence heard the arguments merely of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned order dated 17th September, 1997, it is noticed that a notice of application was issued to public at large. It was posted on the conspicuous part of the court house and publication thereof was made in daily newspaper “Rajashan Times” on 29th January, 1997. A copy of the daily newspaper “Rajasthan Times” was submitted in the Court which was taken on record. Pursuant to the said notice, none appeared and raised any objection. Hence, the learned Additional District Judge having recorded the statement of witnesses namely AW/1 Vidya Devi, AW/2 Dulichand, AW/3 Jainarain and AW/4 Banwari, issued the succession certificate in favour of the respondents petitioners. The appellant neither filed any objection nor was a party in the -3- application before the learned trial Court. So far as the succession certificate is concerned it was issued for a particular purpose which is mentioned in the certificate. The petitioners respondents were authorized by way of succession certificate to withdraw Rs.5.95 deposited in Account No.72391 of deceased Deendayal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that under the garb of succession certificate, Smt. Vidya Devi who after the death of her husband Deendayal had remarried to one Hari Prakash Sharma had been trying to grab the immovable property left by Deendayal, hence she should be restrained from doing so. So far as the fact of remarriage of Vidya Devi with Hari Prakash Sharma is concerned neither it was concealed by Vidya Devi nor it has emerged for the first time before this Court. The succession certificate was issued for a particular purpose which must have been fulfilled by now. If this certificate is being misused by Smt. Vidya Devi to grab the immovable property of deceased Deendayal, the appellant, if aggrieved, may avail any legal remedy, available to her. But so far as the impugned order dated 17th September, 1997 is concerned, it is found to be perfectly just and proper which suffers from no infirmity. -4- The appeal is found to be totally baseless and groundless and has no legs to stand. Thus, it being totally devoid of substance deserves to be dismissed. 6. For the reasons stated above, the appeal filed by the appellant Charitra Devi fails and the same stands dismissed. 7. No order as to costs. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg item No.11