IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 8 of 2007 Nityanand Bhatt S/O Late Jiva Nand Bhatt. … Appellant. Versus Lal Mani Bhatt and others. … Respondents. Mr. B.S.Adhikari, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. B.P.Nautiyal, Advocate, for the respondent no.2-Puran Chandra Bhatt. Date March 04, 2011. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 19-12-2006 passed by the District Judge, Pithoragarh in Succession Case No. 12 of 2003, Nitya Nand Bhatt Vs. Lalmani Bhatt and others, whereby a succession certificate was granted in favour of the nominee-respondent no.2. It appears that the petitioner filed an application for obtaining succession certificate in respect of the assets left by his real brother-deceased Bhawani Datt Bhatt, who died on 22-5-2002. The deceased was allegedly unmarried at the time of his death. The respondent no.2 was arrayed as opposite party no. 2, who is also a real brother and nominee of the deceased. The District Judge Pithoragarh has rejected the application of the petitioner and has held that the respondent no. 2 Puran Chandra Bhatt is entitled to get the assets of the deceased, as mentioned in the impugned order. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that this fact is not disputed that the appellant is the real brother of the deceased Bhawani Datt Bhatt and nomination was made in favour of respondent no. 2-Puran Chandra Bhatt, another real brother of the deceased, but the learned District Judge has exceeded her jurisdiction by recording a finding that the respondent no. 2 Puran Chandra Bhatt had incurred expenses in the treatment of the deceased and if the amount of expenses is adjusted, no amount if left for distribution to other legal heirs of the deceased. 2 It is further contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that aforesaid finding of the District Judge is perverse in view of the provision of Section 387 of the Indian Succession Act. Section 387 of the Indian Succession Act reads as under:- “387. Effect of decisions under this Act, and liability of holder of certificate thereunder.- No decision under this Part upon any question of right between any parties shall be held to bar the trial of the same question in any suit or in any other proceeding between the same parties, and nothing in this Part shall be construed to affect the liability of any person who may receive the whole or any part of any debt or security, or any interest or dividend on any security, to account therefor to the person lawfully entitled thereto.” In my view, the aforesaid finding recorded by the learned District Judge to the effect that respondent Puran Chandra Bhatt had incurred expenses in the treatment of the deceased and no money would be left for distribution to other legal heirs of the deceased, if the amount of expenses is adjusted. I am also of the considered view that the grant of succession certificate in favour of any person only empowers him to receive the assets, dividends etc. left by the deceased on behalf of all the persons, who are lawfully entitled thereto. Since the proceeding pertaining to grant of succession certificate is summary in nature and the succession certificate is only granted to receive the amount under the succession certificate. It is well settled that the nominee has right to receive the amount on behalf of all the legal heirs. In a proceeding for succession certificate, the court is not concerned with any question of title. Mere grant of succession certificate in favour of one of the legal heirs of the deceased does not disentitles other legal heirs of their share in the amount under the certificate. Mr. B.P.Nautiyal, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2 informed the Court that the appellant had already filed a suit bearing O.S. No 32 of 2008 for a decree of 3 declaration before competent civil court and the same is pending regarding the right to get the share of deceased brother. In the above facts and circumstances, in view of the provision of Section 387 of the Indian Succession Act 1925, the finding recorded by the District Judge, so far as it questions the shares of the legal heirs of the deceased to the amount under the succession certificate, shall not bar any civil suit. The civil court shall decide independently the rights of the parties in accordance with law. Consequently, the appeal deserves to be partly allowed. The appeal is partly allowed only to the extent that the finding recorded by the District Judge that no amount is left for distribution to other legal heirs of the deceased and the appellant is not entitled to get any amount and so far as it questions the shares of the legal heirs of the deceased to the amount under succession certificate is hereby quashed. So far as grant of succession certificate in favour of respondent no.2-Puran Chandra Bhatt is concerned, the order under appeal is affirmed. (B.S.Verma, J.) RCP