- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102116 OF 2020 (ISA) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. UMA W/O. NAGAPPA NAGANUR, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: JIDDI ONI, EXTN. AREA, AMARGOL, HUBBALLI, TALUK: HUBBALLI, DHARWAD, PIN- 580 009. 2. SMT. PAVITRA W/O. BSAVARAJ KITTUR (BEFORE MARRIAGE KNOWN AS SUPRIYA D/O. NAGAPA NAGANUR), AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: MALER ONI, AMARGOL, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580 009. 3. SMT. SUSHMA W/O. VIJAYAKUMAR RAMPUR (BEFORE MARRIAGE KNOWN AS SUSHMA D/O. NAGAPPA NAGANUR), AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: MIG-28, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580 009. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: NIL … RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 384 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSIONS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.01.2020 PASSED IN P AND SC NO.12/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUBBALLI, AT HUBBALLI. R Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) The appeal is filed by the appellants/petitioners challenging the order passed in P & SC No.12/2019 dated 07.01.2020 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi (for short, ‘Probate Court’), thereby, the petition filed under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short, ‘the Act’), for grant of succession certificate is dismissed. 2. For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Probate Court. 3. It is the case of claimants that petitioner No.1 is second wife and petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the children of deceased Nagappa Naganur. Since the first wife could not conceive, the deceased Nagappa, with consent of his first wife, solemnized second marriage with petitioner No.1. The first wife, being issueless, died on 12.01.2015. The deceased - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 husband-Nagappa Naganur died on 30.08.2017. Therefore, the petitioners have filed the petition under Section 372 of the Act for claiming succession certificate. The Probate Court has dismissed the petition only on the reason that the petitioners are not seeking succession certificate in respect of the valuable securities. But they have sought for seeking family pension, which is not within purview of the Court to grant. Due to this reason, the Probate Court has dismissed the petition. 4. Heard arguments from the learned counsel for the appellants and perused records. The following point arise for consideration: i) Whether, under the facts and circumstances involved in the case, pension, family pension, gratuity, terminal benefits and insurance polices etc., are to be considered as valuable securities for the purpose of petition to be filed under Section 372 of the Act? 5. In a very similar facts and circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vidyadhari And Others - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 Vs. Sukhrana Bai And Others1, has granted succession certificate for the purpose of family pension. In that case also there were two marriages solemnized by the deceased and when there were rival disputes between two wives and their children, the petition is filed under Section 372 of the Act, for claiming family pension. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has entertained the petition and ordered for issuance of succession certificate for family pension. 6. In the present case, there is no dispute regarding the status of 1st petitioner as wife and petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the children of deceased Nagappa Naganur through the 1st petitioner. There was no rival claim, opposing grant of succession certificate. The observation made by the Probate Court that Section 372 of the Act could not be invoked for family pension, as it is not valuable security, is not correct approach of the Probate Court. 7. What is “valuable security” within the meaning of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short the 1 (2008) 2 SCC 238 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 ‘I.S. Act’), can be considered with the aid of Section 30 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). 8. Section 30 of the IPC defines the “valuable security” as follows: “The term ‘valuable security’ denotes a document which is, or purports to be, a document whereby any legal right is created, extended, transferred, restricted, extinguished, or released, or whereby any person acknowledges that he lies under legal liability, or has not a certain legal right.” 9. Section 372 of the I.S. Act stipulates about who can apply for a succession certificate when a person dies intestate. A succession certificate allows the holder to collect debts and valuable securities due to the deceased. The following things can be considered as valuable securities under Section 372 of the I.S. Act: (The list is not exhaustive but illustrative) i) Fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) ii) Government bonds iii) Promissory notes iv) Shares and debentures - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 v) Life insurance policies vi) Mutual fund certificates vii) Any negotiable instrument or legal document evidencing a financial right 10. The succession certificate under Section 372 of the I.S. Act is necessary to claim or recover debts and valuable securities of the deceased when no will exists. 11. “Valuable security” within the meaning of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act refers to any legal document or instrument through which the deceased held a legal financial right or obligation, and which can be claimed or transferred by their legal heir through a succession certificate. The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India and Others Vs. M.S. Basi and Others2, although addresses principles of natural justice in granting succession certificates, it reaffirms the broad scope of “security” to include movable financial assets like fixed deposits, bonds, shares etc., recognizing them as “valuable securities” that can be claimed through a certificate. Therefore, the valuable securities include 2 (2004) 11 SCC 347 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 debts, negotiable instruments, certificates, bonds, shares and fixed deposits etc. Therefore, “valuable securities” has a broad meaning, covering most documented financial claims. 12. Therefore, the probate Court has committed error while considering the petition for claiming family pension by holding erroneously that family pension is not a valuable security. Whatever legal right accrues after death of a person, who dies intestate and for claiming his estate the movable assets also can be considered as valuable security. The movable assets also includes pension for which the right accrues on part of the petitioners for claiming succession certificate of receiving such terminal benefits upon death of a person. Therefore, for claiming family pension, a petition under Section 372 of I.S. Act is very well maintainable. 13. Upon the death of deceased Nagappa Naganur, the death cum terminal benefits would also become valuable securities. Therefore, for claiming such terminal benefits of valuable securities, such as pension, family pension, gratuity and insurance policy amount etc., are also to be considered as valuable securities. Therefore, for claiming those valuable - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 securities, the petition is filed under Section 372 of the Act and is maintainable. 14. In this regard, the Probate Court has committed serious error in rejecting the petition. Therefore, the order passed by the Probate Court is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, I answer point above point for consideration No.(i) in the ‘affirmative’. 15. Since there are some disputed facts and to receive evidence on those facts, the matter is remanded to the Probate Court for receiving evidence and after that the Probate Court shall pass appropriate orders as per law. Therefore, with these observations, the case is remanded to the Probate Court. 16. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The order passed in P & SC No.12/2019 dated 07.01.2020 on the file of the Principal Civil - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8098 MFA No. 102116 of 2020 Judge and JMFC, Hubballi, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Probate Court. iii. The appellants shall appear before the Probate Court on 15.07.2025 without expecting any notice from the Court. iv. The Probate Court shall dispose off the case within six months from the date of appearance of the parties. v. All contentions are kept open. vi. No order as to costs. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 47