Final Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. MANSI MALIK, ACJ/ARC
NORTH-WEST DISTRICT: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
Succ. Court 159/2023
CNR No. DLNW030025822023
Date of Filing : 19.09.2023
Date of Judgment : 08.09.2025
Final Order : Petition allowed.
In the matter of:
1. Sh. Vinay Sharma,
S/o Sh. Radhey Shyam Sharma,
R/o 1877/90, Third Floor, Shanti Nagar,
Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110085.
2. Ms. Parkhi Sharma (Minor),
Through Natural Guardian,Sh. Vinay Sharma,
R/o 1877/90, Third Floor, Shanti Nagar,
Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110085. … Petitioners
VERSUS
1. The State (Govt of NCT Delhi) ….Respondents
JUDGMENT ON PETITION UNDER SECTION 372
OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section
372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, seeking issuance of succession
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 1/6
-- 1 of 6 --
certificate with respect to the amount available in the various saving
accounts/FDRs (
hereinafter referred to as “assets”) in the name of the
deceased late Smt. Komal Taneja (
hereinafter referred to as “deceased”).
2. As per the petition, the petitioner no. 1 is the husband and petitioner
no. 2 is the daughter of the deceased late Smt. Komal Taneja who expired
on 23.05.2023 and at that time, she was ordinarily residing at 1877/90,
Third Floor, Shanti Nagar, Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110085. Petitioner no. 1
and 2 are stated to be the only surviving legal heirs of the deceased. It is
stated that no Will was executed by the deceased during her lifetime in
respect of assets in question. It is stated that there is no impediment to the
grant of succession certificate in favor of the petitioner under the
Succession Act.
3. After filing of present petition, notice was issued and general public
was served through publication in daily newspaper
'Veer Arjun', Hindi
edition dated 06.02.2024, to invite objections from the public at large to
the grant of succession certificate to the petitioner but none appeared from
general public to oppose or contest the present petition. Further, petitioner
no. 1 was appointed as natural guardian of petitioner no. 2 being her father
vide order dated 03.07.2025 only for the purposes of the present petition.
4. A report regarding LRs of deceased late Smt. Komal Taneja has
also been received from the office of SDM, Saraswati Vihar as per which
Sh. Vinay Sharma (husband) and Ms. Parkhi Sharma (daughter) are the
legal heirs of the said deceased.
5. During the summary proceedings conducted as per Section 372 of
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 2/6
-- 2 of 6 --
the Indian Succession Act, 1925, 03 witnesses were examined.
6. Petitioner no. 1/PW-2 Sh. Vinay Sharma tendered his evidence by
way of affidavit Ex. PW-2/A testifying that he is the husband of the
deceased and that no Will was executed by his wife in respect of the assets
in question. He further testified that there are only two legal heirs of the
deceased i.e. himself and petitioner no. 2. He further testified that he is the
natural guardian of petitioner no. 2. PW-2 relied upon the following
documents:-
a) Copy of his Aadhar card i.e. Ex. PW-2/1(OSR);
b) Copy of death certificate of the deceased i.e. Ex. PW-2/2 (OSR);
c) Copy of birth certificate of petitioner no. 2/Ms. Parkhi Sharma i.e. Ex.
RW-2/3(OSR),
d) Photocopy of SMC i.e. Ex. PW-2/4(OSR);
e) Photocopy of letter to the bank dated 26.07.2023 i.e. Mark A;
f) Photocopy of postal receipt i.e. Mark B;
7. RW-1/Satish has brought on record LR report i.e. Ex. RW-1/1 as per
which Sh. Vinay Sharma is the husband and Ms. Parkhi Sharma is the
daughter of the deceased.
8. PW-1/Usama Khan, Associate Manager, IndusInd Bank,
Barakhamba Branch, has brought the summoned record i.e. details of
saving bank account bearing no. 151912201923 having a balance of Rs.
965/- approximately as on the said date alongwith FDR no. 300935041711
having a balance of Rs. 2,20,000/- as on date and FDR no. 30938050857
having a balance of Rs. 1,00,000/- as on date which is supported with
certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act i.e. Ex. PW-1/3. It is
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 3/6
-- 3 of 6 --
further stated that the account is in the name of Ms. Komal Taneja and
nominee of the above-mentioned record is Ms. Sakshi Gangwani. PW-1
also filed his authority letter dated 02.01.2024 i.e. Ex. PW-1/1 and short
reply dated 02.01.2024 i.e. Ex. PW-1/2 and statement of saving bank
account bearing no. 151912201923 from 14.09.2022 till 01.01.2024 i.e.
Ex. PW-1/4.
9. No other witness was sought to be summoned or examined by the
petitioner. Therefore, PE was closed vide order dated 03.07.2025 and the
matter was listed for final arguments.
10. Arguments heard. Record perused. During the final arguments,
petitioner submitted that Ms. Sakshi Gangwani, nominee in the IndusInd
Bank account, is the sister of the deceased. Further, a perusal of the record
shows that during the course of trial, an application for impleading Ms.
Sakshi Gangwani/sister of the deceased as party in the present matter was
moved but the same was dismissed on 20.02.2025 as sister of the deceased
is not a Class-I legal heir.
11. From the material on record, it stands proved that deceased Smt.
Komal Taneja expired on 23.05.2023 and at that time, she was ordinarily
residing at 1877/90, Third Floor, Shanti Nagar, Tri Nagar, New
Delhi-110085, which confers the territorial jurisdiction upon this Court.
As per LR report, it is brought on record that the deceased left behind Sh.
Vinay Sharma (husband) and Ms. Parkhi Sharma (daughter) as her legal
heirs.
12. From the record produced by the concerned bank and statement of
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 4/6
-- 4 of 6 --
account, the total amount left behind by the deceased has been brought on
record. Succession certificate has been sought by petitioner no. 1.
Petitioner no. 1 is also the Class-I legal heir of the deceased being her
husband. Further, petitioner no. 1 has already been appointed as natural
guardian of petitioner no. 2, who is a minor. No impediment has been
brought on record in respect of grant of succession certificate in favor of
petitioner no.1.
13. Considering the above, petitioner no. 1 and petitioner no. 2 are held
entitled to Succession Certificate for half share each in the assets in
question. However, petitioner no. 1 is granted his share as well as the
share of petitioner no. 2 being her natural guardian, in respect of the
following accounts in the name of deceased Late Smt. Komal Taneja along
with accrued interest, if any.
Account no. Type of account Maintained with Total
approximate
value
151912201923 Saving Bank Account IndusInd Bank,
Barakhamba
Branch
Rs. 965/-
300935041711 FDR Rs. 2,20,000/-
30938050857 FDR Rs. 1,00,000/-
14. The succession certificate be issued in favor of the petitioner no. 1
Sh. Vinay Sharma on furnishing of an Indemnity Bond of the same value
with one surety of like amount each within one month from today.
Petitioner to file court fees in terms of Article 12 Schedule 1 of the Court
Fees Act as applicable to Delhi for issuance of succession certificate.
15. It is clarified, that succession certificate shall be considered only as
an entitlement of petitioner to receive the amount due towards late Smt.
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 5/6
-- 5 of 6 --
Komal Taneja from concerned Bank(s)/company so as to discharge the
debtor(s).
16. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in an Open Court. (Mansi Malik)
ACJ/ARC/North-West District
Rohini District Courts
Delhi/08.09.2025
Succ. No. 159/2023 Vinay Sharma Vs. State Page No. 6/6
-- 6 of 6 --