$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010436952024 + FAO 238/2024, CM APPL. 42020/2024 & CM APPL. 42025/2024 DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION AND OTHERS .....Appellants Through: Mr. Ruchir Mishra, Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Saxena, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Ms. Reba Jena Mishra and Ms. Poonam Shukla, Advocates versus MS MAYA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Sinha, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 07.09.2026 1. By way of the present appeal filed under Section 384(1) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), the appellants seek to assail the order dated 09.08.2023 passed by the learned ACJ/CCJ/ARC (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi in SC No. 5963/16, titled as “Ms. Maya v. The State and Others”. 2. Notably, the impugned order came to be passed in the petition filed by the respondent for grant of Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Act in the context of death of her brother late Shri Jagdish Singh Verma, who was stated to have expired on 05.12.1991. The deceased, during his lifetime, served as a Temporary Lineman with BSNL and was lastly posted at Jind, Haryana. The petitioner who is the sister of the deceased, further claimed that she was the only surviving legal heir of the deceased and that This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/09/2026 at 11:11:44 their mother, namely, Smt. Dhullo Devi, as well as two other brothers, namely, Shri Sudhir Kumar and Shri Harish Kumar, had already expired. Their Death Certificates were placed on record. 3. The present appeal has been preferred stating that the Trial Court had before it, the documentary evidence, which indicated that the service records of the deceased reflected that he was married and had a wife, namely, Smt. Jaswinder Kaur. Despite the aforesaid fact having been brought to the notice of the Trial Court, no attempt was made to issue notice to her. 4. While learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the Department had raised no such objection before the Trial Court, learned counsel for the appellants, on the other hand, stated that though the aforesaid fact was inadvertently not mentioned in the written statement, however, the written arguments filed before the Trial Court had the aforesaid averment. 5. Although, learned counsel for the respondent had initially raised an objection on the maintainability of the present appeal, however, during the course of hearing, has not pressed the said objection and rather withdrew it. 6. The record reflects that the Trial Court had itself, on 14.12.2017, noted the existence of the wife and directed the petitioner to appear in person with an explanation regarding the status and whereabouts of Smt. Jaswinder Kaur so that notice could be served upon her. The issue regarding the wife was again taken up in the subsequent proceedings, wherein the petitioner’s assertion regarding the death of Smt. Jaswinder Kaur was brought before the Trial Court. However, no death certificate or other document establishing her death was placed on record. Thereafter, no further effective steps appear to have been taken to ascertain the status and whereabouts of Smt. Jaswinder Kaur. The impugned order has overlooked This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/09/2026 at 11:11:44 the aforesaid relevant fact and the Succession Certificate has been granted by noting that the deceased being an unmarried person has been survived only by the present petitioner. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the concerned Court, which shall take the requisite steps to ascertain the status and whereabouts of Smt. Jaswinder Kaur and thereafter, proceed in accordance with law. In case the assertion of the petitioner regarding the death of Smt. Jaswinder Kaur is found to be false, the concerned Court shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law. The matter be listed before the Trial Court on 23.09.2026. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. 9. The appeal along with pending applications stand disposed of in the above terms. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 7, 2026/RW This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/09/2026 at 11:11:44