Delhi High Court
Man Mohan Sankhdher & Ors. vs State on 7 December, 2016
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TEST.CAS. 74/2011
MAN MOHAN SANKHDHER & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr Aruneshwar Gupta and Mr Ayush
Khanna, Advocates.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER
% 07.12.2016
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 217 of
the Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeking grant of Letters of Administration
in respect of the property bearing no. 89 Vaishali, Pitampura, Delhi -110034
(hereafter 'the Property') of Late Mr Madan Mohan Sankhdher (hereafter
'the Deceased').
2. It has been averred in the petition that petitioners are class-II legal
heirs of the Deceased. Petitioner no. 2 and 3 are brothers of the Deceased
and petitioner nos.1, 4 and 5 are the legal heirs of Late Mr Lalit Mohan
Sankhdher (brother of the Deceased). However, during the course of
proceedings, petitioner no. 3, Mr Brijendra Mohan Sankhdher expired and
therefore, by an order dated 19.07.2012 the legal heirs of petitioner no. 3
were substituted as petitioner nos. 3(i), 3(ii) and 3 (iii).
3. On 09.09.2011, Notice of the petition was issued to the Chief
Controlling Revenue Authority. Valuation Report in respect of the Property
has also been received from the Office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
Model Town, Delhi.
4. By an order of this Court, objections were invited from public at large
and Citation was published in the newspapers: "Rajasthan Patrika" edition
dated 22.12.2012; in "Dainik Jagran" on 23.12.2012; and in "Sunday
Pioneer" on 23.12.2012. However, no objection has been received after the
publication of Citation. Petitioner no.1 (hereafter 'PW1') has filed an
affidavit by way of evidence affirming the averments made in the petition.
5. The facts that emerge from the affidavit of PW1 are as follows:
5.1 A perpetual lease of the Property was executed in favour of the
deceased on 04.09.1977. A photocopy of the perpetual lease deed in favour
of the deceased has been marked as Exhibit P/1.
5.2 The Deceased married Ms Mandankani Sankhdher on 25.09.1987.
5.3 The deceased died intestate on 21.12.2002, leaving behind his wife,
Ms Mandankani Sankhdher as his only class - I legal heir. A photocopy of
the Death Certificate of the Deceased has been filed and marked as Exhibit
P/2.
5.4 Thereafter, the Property was mutated in the name of Ms Mandankani
Sankhdher on 06.02.2008. True photocopy of the mutation certificate has
been marked as Exhibit P/3.
5.5 Ms Mandankani Sankhdher also expired intestate on 25.04.2008,
leaving behind no class-I legal heir. A photocopy of the Death Certificate of
Ms Mandankani Sankhdher has been filed and marked as Exhibit P/4.
6. It is further deposed by PW1 that all the class-II legal heirs of the
Deceased are parties (petitioners herein) before this Court. It is further stated
that no class-I legal heir of the Deceased exists as it is stated that he died
issueless.
7. Petitioner no.2 has also filed an affidavit affirming the averments
made in the petition. Petitioner no. 3(ii) [being special power attorney holder
of petitioner no. 3(i) and (iii)] has also filed an affidavit on behalf of
petitioner no. 3(i) and (iii) similar to the affidavits mentioned above.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and have
examined the affidavits filed by the petitioners. As per the evidence, the
Deceased was the owner of the Property. The petitioners have duly proved
that the Deceased died intestate and issueless. It has also been duly proved
that Property in question was mutated in favour of Ms Mandankani
Sankhdher after the death of the Deceased. The petitioners have duly proved
that Ms Mandankani Sankhdher also died intestate and issueless. The
petitioners have further proved that they are Class - II legal heirs of the
Deceased and that no Class-I heir of the Deceased exists.
9. Despite a citation been published in the abovementioned newspapers,
no objection against the present petition has been received. Accordingly,
there is no legal impediment in granting the Letters of Administration in
favour of the petitioners.
10. The petition is therefore, allowed.
11. Accordingly, it is directed that Letters of Administration in respect of
the Property be issued in favour of the petitioners on furnishing an
administration bond with two sureties and requisite court fee, subject to the
satisfaction of the Registrar General of this Court .
12. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
DECEMBER 07, 2016
RK
