Allowed

Konjeti Prem Kumar, v. The Government of India

Andhra Pradesh HC6 May 2024WP/5519/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the non-payment of deceased's post office funds despite issuance of a Succession Certificate in petitioner's favor. The Court directed the release of funds as objectors had not obtained orders from competent authorities to set aside the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directs respondents to release the amount to the petitioner within one month on undertaking.

Konjeti Prem Kumar, Vs The Government of India — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 5519 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Konjeti Prem Kumar, S/o. K. Adinarayana, Aged about 54 years, R/o. D.No.3/762, Varadaraja Temple Street, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati District. ...Petitioner AND

¶8

The Government of India, Department of Post Offices, Rep by its Secretary, Delhi.

¶9

The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Tirupati Division, Tirupati, Tirupati District.

¶10

The Deputy Post Master, Head Post Office, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati District.

¶11

The Sub Post Master, North SO, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati^District.

¶12

...Respondents -

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of respondents 2 to 4 in not paying the amount to the petitioner as shown in the schedule of succession certificate issued in S.O.P No. 5 of 2022 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sri kalahasti as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to pay the amounts with interest payable upto date of payment^as shown in the

¶14

¶15

schedule to the succession certificate issued in S.O.P. No. 5 of 2022 dated. 23.02.2023 to the petitioner.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to pay the amounts to the petitioner with interest lying with the respondents 3 and 4.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P GANGA RAMI REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶20

The Court made the following order:

¶21

APHC010104772024

¶22

[3233]

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶24

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶25

TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 5519/2024

¶29

Between:

¶30

Konjeti Prem Kumar, ...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

The Government Of India and Others

¶33

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶35

1.PGANGARAMI REDDY

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶37

1 .A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶38

A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶39

A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶40

4.A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)

¶41

The Court made the following Order:

¶42

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the^{learnedCentral}

¶43

Government Counsel for the respondents.

¶44

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not paying the amount to the petitioner as^shown in the schedule of

¶45

¶46

Succession Certificate in S.O.P.No.5 of 2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge,

¶47

Sri Kalahasti.

¶48

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that^{oneSriKatabathina} Janardhan executed his last and final will on 14.04.2021 in favour of the petitioner bequeathing all his properties including^{thesavingsaccountand} NSC bonds. The said Sri Katabathina Janardhan died^{on01.05.2021.Afterhis} death the petitioner approached the respondent Nos.3^and4topaythe amounts as shown in NSC Bonds. The concerned authorities^asked the petitioner to produce the Succession Certificate from^thecompetent Civil Court. The petitioner filed the S.O.P.No.5 of 2022^{onthefileofSeniorCivil} Judge, Sri Kalahasti under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeking relief to grant Succession Certificate. The^{respondentNos.3and4are} parties to the said S.O.P.No.5 of 2022. Upon hearing^{thematter,theSenior} Civil Judge, Sri Kalahasti passed an order in S.O.P.No.5 of 2022 dated 23.02.2023 by allowing the same to issue the Succession^{Certificateinfavour} of the petitioner for collection of the amount of Rs.54,67,367/-^{asmentionedin} the schedule belonging to the deceased/Katabathina^Janardhan.

¶49

The engross of the Succession Certificate of the non^{judicialstamp} paper was also executed on 23.02.2023 for a total sum^{ofRs.54,67,367/-.} Inspite of submitting the necessary documents viz..^Succession Certificate order dated 25.02.2023, engross certificate dated 23.02.2023^andwillofthe deceased dated 14.04.2021 also the respondents have^{notreleasedthesaid} amount so far, hence this Writ Petition.

¶50

¶51

On the other hand, the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents relying upon the counter affidavit of the respondents submits that in the post office savings bank account of the deceased/Katabathina Janardhan, one Smt. B.Amaravathi is shown as nominee, whose relationship with the deceased/Katabathina Janardhan is sister-in-law”. But that account was opened on 09.02.2018.

¶52

He further submits that in the enquiry it was identified that Late Sri Katabathina Janardhan at the time of making said^{investmentsnominated} one Smt. B. Amaravathi, W/o. Sri. K. Rangaiah, brother of Late Sri Katabathina Janardhan to be the sole recipient of the amount standing at the credit of the account in the event of his death. Smt. K. Sailaja, daughter of Smt. B. Amaravathi and Sri K. Rangaiah submitted a representation to the respondent No.4 requesting for maintaining status-quo^{intheclaimsanction} process and issued a legal notice to the respondent No.4. Further one Smt. K. Adilakshumma alias Nukala Adilakshumma sister of Late Sri. Katabathina Janardhan also submitted a representation to the respondent No.4 requesting to maintain status-quo in the claim sanction process and requested for giving her time to prove her eligibility^{toclaimtheinvestmentin} her favour as she being the immediate blood relative^{toLateSri.Katabathina} Janardhan.

¶53

Further, the learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents also refers to the enquiry report dated 10.02.2024 wherein they obtained the family diagram of the deceased/Katabathina Janardhan.

¶54

¶55

Unless appropriate orders are produced from the competent^authorities by the above said objectors, the respondent Nos.2 to^{4cannotwithholdthe} amounts lying with them in the account of the deceased person by obstructing the operation of the Succession Certificate.

¶56

In view of the above said facts and circumstances, it is to be seen that the above said objectors have not thereafter approached the authorities concerned with any orders in favour of them to make^{aclaimforthesaid} amount of the deceased/Katabathina Janardhan lying with the respondent No.4. Whereas, the petitioner approached with the above^{saiddocuments} stating that there is a Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner. It appears that the objectors who are said to be claiming^theamount of the deceased/Katabathina Janardhan have not even taken the necessary steps seeking to set aside the above said Succession Certificate.^Thereare no contrary orders passed by the competent authorities^{infavouroftheabove} said objectors and also they have not filed any objection petition or implead application in this Court. In view of the same, there^{isnoreasontowithhold} the payments under the above said Succession Certificate in favour of the petitioner by the respondent Nos.2 to 4.

¶57

For the foregoing reasons, the respondent Nos.2 to^{4aredirectedto} release the amount as per the Succession Certificate to the petitioner and by taking necessary undertaking from the petitioner, the^{samecanbereleased} as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one(OI) month from the date of receipt of this order.

¶58

¶59

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶60

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶61

SDI- V.SAVITHRI GOWRI //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶62

¶63

SECTION OFFICER

¶64

The Secretary, Government of India, Department of Post Offices, Delhi.

¶65

The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,, Tirupati Division, Tirupati Tirupati District. ’

¶66

The Deputy Post Master, Head Post Office, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati District.

¶67

The Sub Post Master, North SO, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati^District.

¶68

One CC to SRI. P GANGA RAMI REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶69

One CC to SRI. A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) [Ur'UUj

¶70

Two CD Copies

KRL

HIGH COURT

DATED:07/05/2024

'O
o o
o ir;.
x: 2 7 .lU^‘ os
->
o^^citon j
Curfbf*-

¶75

ORDER

¶76

WP.No.5519 of 2024

¶77

Disposing the Writ Petition without costs

Konjeti Prem Kumar, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Konjeti Prem Kumar, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhanoosh and Economically Poor People Vs the Union of India

M/s. Psr Infrastructures Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M Solomon Raju Vs Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh

D Venkateswara Raju Vs the State of Ap

Satya Prasad Lalam, Vs Union of India

Vallivedu Sreenivasulu Reddy Vs the Union of India