Premium
This is an archive article published on May 10, 2023

Succession certificate does not determine rights of parties: Karnataka High Court

The parents of a deceased hospital employee had approached the court against the grant of succession certificate to his son and daughter-in-law.

karnataka high court, karnataka high court, succession certificatesKarnataka High Court (File Photo)
Listen to this article
Succession certificate does not determine rights of parties: Karnataka High Court
x
00:00
1x 1.5x 1.8x

The grant of a succession certificate will not determine the rights of parties in any way, a single-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court in Kalaburagi held recently.

“…grant of succession certificate merely identifies the hands in which death benefits (etc) be given and it does not entitle such person to appropriate such benefits to himself. Grant of succession certificate will not determine the rights of parties in any way,” Justice C M Joshi said while dismissing a civil revision petition by an elderly couple on April 21. The verdict was made public later.

The parents of a deceased hospital employee, Nagappa, had approached the court against the grant of succession certificate to Nagappa’s son and daughter-in-law. The son and his wife had approached a lower court to obtain the said certificate on the grounds of being Class I heirs as per the Hindu Succession Act. Nagappa’s parents had opposed this on the grounds that they were the Class I heirs. The bench ruled that the succession certificate and service benefits would be in the hands of the son and wife. However, the bench did not rule against the rights of the parents.

Nagappa’s parents then approached the district court, arguing that his son and wife should not have been the sole recipients of the certificate. The bench observed that the court did not have the power to go into the question of detailed facts for mere grant of succession certificate, noting that the parents still had the right to approach the appropriate court regarding their grievance.

Approaching the high court, the counsel for Nagappa’s parents argued that a joint certificate should have been granted but the bench noted that Nagappa’s father was not a Class I heir and dismissed the petition.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments