Petitioners challenged unequal distribution of retirement benefits by the deceased employee's nominee. The court held that nomination does not confer beneficial interest; heirs entitled to shares under Hindu Succession Act. Petition disposed.
Petitioners invited to seek remedy under Hindu Succession Act for equal distribution of benefits among heirs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1324 of 2022
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Maheshwar Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, C.G.C.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 21-09-2023
Heard Mr. Maheshwar Prasad, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, learned C.G.C. for the respondent/s.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1324 of 2022 dt.21-09-2023 2/5
petitioners submitted that in paragraph no. 16 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2- the Director, Bihar Geo- Spatia Data Center it is stated that the retirement benefits due to the deceased employee, namely, Late Md. Modin has been paid to his eldest son, namely, Md. Sarfuddin to whom the deceased employee had nominated as would be reflected from the service book of Late Md. Modin, who had retired from the post of Jamadar from Bihar Geo- Spatial Data Center, Patna. Petitioner is aggrieved that his elder brother, namely, Md. Sarfuddin has not distributed the retiral benefits among the legal heirs of Late Md. Modin in equal shares and in this regard learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of Shipra Sengupta v. Mridul Sengupta & Ors. reported in (2009) 10 SCC 680 .
Patna High Court CWJC No.1324 of 2022 dt.21-09-2023 3/5
(Supra) are quoted herein below :-
“15. The appellant also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Vishin N. Khanchandani v. Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani [(2000) 6 SCC 724] , wherein this Court held that: (SCC pp. 734-35, para 13)
“13. … the law laid down by this Court in Sarbati Devi [(1984) 1 SCC 424 : 1984 SCC (Tax) 59] holds the field and is equally applicable to the nominee becoming entitled to the payment of the amount on account of National Savings Certificates received by him under Section 6 read with Section 7 of the Act who in turn is liable to return the amount to those in whose favour the law creates a beneficial interest, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 8 of the Act.”
16. Learned counsel for the appellant also placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in Ashok Chand Aggarwala v. Delhi Admn. [(1998) 7 AD 639 (Del)] This case related to the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act. The High Court while following Sarbati Devi case [(1984) 1 SCC 424 : 1984 SCC (Tax) 59] held that it is well settled that mere nomination made in favour of a particular person does not have the effect of conferring on the nominee any beneficial interest in property after the death of the person concerned. The nomination indicates the hand which is authorised to receive the amount or manage the property. The property or the amount, as the case may be, can be claimed by the heirs of the deceased, in accordance with the law of succession governing them.
17. The controversy involved in the instant case is no longer res integra. The nominee is entitled to receive the same, but the amount so received is to be distributed according to the law of succession. In terms of the factual foundation laid in the present case, the deceased died on 8-11-1990
Patna High Court CWJC No.1324 of 2022 dt.21-09-2023 4/5
leaving behind his mother and widow as his only heirs and legal representatives entitled to succeed. Therefore, on the day when the right of succession opened, the appellant, his widow became entitled to one-half of the amount of the general provident fund, the other half going to the mother and on her death, the other surviving son getting the same.”
“12. …The nomination only indicates the hand which is authorised to receive the amount, on the payment of which the insurer gets a valid discharge of its liability under the policy. The amount, however, can be claimed by the heirs of the assured in accordance with the law of succession governing them.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.1324 of 2022 dt.21-09-2023 5/5
beneficial interest on the nominee.
of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
| AFR/NAFR | N.A.F.R. |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 27.09.2023 |
| Transmission Date | N/A |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the nominee of a deceased employee has beneficial interest in the retirement benefits or merely the right to receive them for distribution among heirs.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shipra Sengupta v. Mridul SenguptaReferred¶23
Shipra Sengupta v. Mridul Sengupta & Ors. (2009) 10 SCC 680 · Who else cites this
Vishin N. Khanchandani v. Vidya Lachmandas KhanchandaniReferred¶28
Vishin N. Khanchandani v. Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani (2000) 6 SCC 724 · Who else cites this
Sarbati DeviReferred¶28
Sarbati Devi [(1984) 1 SCC 424] · Who else cites this
Ashok Chand Aggarwala v. Delhi Admn.Referred¶26
Ashok Chand Aggarwala v. Delhi Admn. [(1998) 7 AD 639 (Del)]
Sarbati Devi and Another v. Smt. Usha DeviReferred¶35
Sarbati Devi and Another v. Smt. Usha Devi (1984) 1 SCC 424 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Saheb Hussain
Saida Khatton
Union of India
Director, Bihar Geo-Spatial Data Central
Sarfuddin
Purnendu Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
