M. Katju and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.@mdashHeard Sri V. K. Burman, learned senior advocate for the petitioner and Sri Anil Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. We have perused the petition, counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit.
3. It appears that the petitioner had obtained a succession certificate dated 18.1.1990 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) in respect of certain properties of her late husband Jamshed Alam. One Samrun Nisa also claiming to be wife of Jamshed Alam filed an application for revoking the order dated 18.1.1990 but that application was rejected on 23.8.1991. Against the order dated 23.8.1991, she filed an appeal before the District Judge being Appeal No. 461 of 1991, which was allowed by the judgment and order dated 7.8.1996. Against the Judgment dated 7.8.1996, the petitioner filed a writ petition being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31895 of 1996, which was allowed on 9.8.1999, Consequently, the judgment dated 18.1.1990, granting succession certificate to the petitioner has become final. Hence, the payment has to be made of the amounts specified in the succession certificate dated 18.1.1990 to the persons in whose favour the succession certificate has been granted.
4. We direct that the payment along with 10% interest from the date it was payable to the petitioner must be paid by the respondents within two months from today.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that interest should not be ordered to be paid. This argument of the learned counsel for the respondent is mis-conceived. Interest is not a penalty but it is the normal accretion on capital. Had the payment of the amounts mentioned in the succession certificate been paid to the petitioner at the time when the amounts were payable, such amounts would have been invested by the petitioner who would have earned Interest thereon.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that the delay in making the payment is due to no fault of the respondents. This argument is also mis-conceived. There is no question of fault of any one because as already observed by us interest is not a penalty at all. Hence, even assuming that there was no fault on the part of the respondents, interest has to be paid by them because the money payable to the petitioner would have been invested somewhere to earn interest thereon, had it been paid on time.
7. Further, we wish to make it clear that the persons in whose favour the succession certificate has been granted will only be entitled to get the property in respect of which the succession certificate has been granted. For any other property left by late Jamshed Alam, the claimant has to file another application for grant of succession certificate. This Is because when the applicant had made the application for succession certificate, the properties of the deceased in respect of which the succession certificate was claimed had to be specified in the application because the court-fee has to be paid accordingly.
8. Hence, it is open to the petitioner to claim the properties left by the deceased by filing another application for issuing succession certificate in respect of the properties which are not mentioned in the succession certificate. Hence, a fresh application for issue of succession certificate will have to be filed by the claimants in respect of the properties of late Jamshed Alam other than those in respect of which succession certificate has already been granted.
9. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
