Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads
In their petition, the 77-year-old mother and 48-year-old wife of the sadhu said M was the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family. "Renouncing worldly affairs amounts to civil death of M and as such all his properties would devolve upon his other legal heirs, namely the petitioners." M's son and daughter have also taken sanyas.
He holds bonds worth about Rs 56 lakh and the date of maturity is Sept 18, 2026. As per RBI guidelines, the bonds are not transferable except in the case of natural death.
Prior to taking sanyas, M sought to know from HDFC Bank the procedure for transmission of RBI bonds to his legal heirs. However, the bank did not accept sanyas as civil death and refused to transfer the bonds. After M took sanyas, his mother and wife applied to the bank, but it failed to transfer/transmit the bonds to them. HDFC's advocate referred to the bank's reply that there is no declaration of M being a karta. The date of maturity is Sept 18, 2026, and as per RBI guidelines, the bonds are not transferable except in the case of natural death. There is no succession certificate/probate submitted and no conclusive evidence to corroborate the claim that M and his children have taken sanyas.
In their on February 21 order, the judges agreed with HDFC's advocate that "whether M and his children took sanyas and renounced the world is a mixed question of facts". They cited a Delhi HC decision that states 'the mere fact that a person declares he has become a sanyasi or describes himself as such or wears clothes worn by sanyasis would not make him a sanyasi'. Also, he 'must perform necessary ceremonies without which renunciation will not complete'.
(With TOI inputs)
