1. One Khuda Baksh an employee of SKIMS Srinagar passed away on 3-11-1995 and on petitioner™s motion Succession Certificate regarding debts securities payable to his legal representatives was issued by Principal District Judge Srinagar on 22-5-2000 in Succession file No. 267/96 in following terms : Therefore, a succession certificate is ordered to be issued in favour of the parents, minor daughter and widow of the deceased on their furnishing several indemnity bonds indemnifying any other claim if and when established in a Court of law. Parents shall get one sixth of the total amount. Out of the balance amount widow shall get one eighth and the remaining amount shall go to minor daughter. The share of the minor shall be deposited in a scheduled bank in the name of the minor till she attains the age of majority. The bank account shall be operative subject to the terms and conditions laid down in the guardianship certificate of the minor.� 2. Aggrieved thereby the parents of deceased appealed against the same in this Court on the ground that widow of the deceased namely Muneera was a divorcee and as such not entitled to any debts securities and accordingly sought modification in the order. The appeal was disposed of by this Court on 26-4-2002 in following terms : From the afore discussed evidence it is prima facie proved that Khuda Bakash Rasti died in the year 1995 after leaving behind his parents, the appellant and respondent No. 3, his widow, respondent No. 2 Mst. Muneera Begum and respondent No. 4, Quarat-ul-Ain and also left behind an amount detailed in para (6) of the petition for issuance of Succession Certificate. Parties are admittedly Muslims as a result of which the trial Court has rightly ordered issuance of Succession Certificate in favour of the parties in accordance with the Muslim Law, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order impugned.� 3. The above said order was sought to be reviewed by appellant through Civil Review petition No. 18/02, which was disallowed by this Court on 30-4-2004 in following terms : Viewed thus, the Review petition is without merit and is dismissed. The above said order was sought to be reviewed by appellant through Civil Review petition No. 18/02, which was disallowed by this Court on 30-4-2004 in following terms : Viewed thus, the Review petition is without merit and is dismissed. However, it be noted that the question whether Muneera Begum was legally wedded wife of Khuda Baksh Rasti at the time of his death or not is still an open question though for purpose of the Succession Certificate and the proceedings under Guardians and Wards Act, the finding of Succession Certificate Court (District Judge) is to be recorded as a final word on the questions of right to get the Succession Certificate.� 4. After dismissal of Review petition the appellants filed an application before PDJ Srinagar for modification of original Succession Certificate of 22-5-2000 seeking re-fixation of shares payable to beneficiaries thereunder and its extension to certain other debts. The said petition was disposed of by concerned PDJ on 7-4-2003 in following terms : Accordingly this application is dismissed. As maintained by the Hon™ble High Court the Succession Certificate to the extent of 1/6 to parents under Muslim Law and 1/8th to widow and remainder to the daughter shall stand.� 5. Against PDJ™s said order of 7-4-2003 the appellant filed another appeal before this Court being Civil 1st Appeal No. 36/03 which was disposed of by this Court on 30-4-2004 : (reported AIR 2004 J & K 147) in following terms (para 5) : In the aforesaid view of the matter the impugned order of the District Judge Srinagar is set aside and the Ld. District Judge is directed to decide afresh the extension of the Succession Certificate, if any, to debts/securities payments due to the deceased claimed before the Succession Certificate Court in respect of the certificate issued on 22-5-2000 in Succession file 27/96. The District Judge, shall rectify the extent of interest and indicate the share to be received by each of the parents as also the widow and the daughter in respect of the amounts specified in the certificates lying with SKIMS Srinagar and J & K Bank Soura.� 6. With aforesaid appellate order the controversy again landed in the Court of PDI Srinagar who disposed it of as follows : A succession certificate in favour of Abdul Gani Rasti father of the deceased Mst. Hajra mother of the deceased Mst. With aforesaid appellate order the controversy again landed in the Court of PDI Srinagar who disposed it of as follows : A succession certificate in favour of Abdul Gani Rasti father of the deceased Mst. Hajra mother of the deceased Mst. Muneera wife of the deceased and Qurat-ul-Ain minor daughter of the deceased is accordingly ordered to be issued in the ratio shown here-in-above i.e. 1/6th to Ab. Gani Rasti 1/6th to Mst. Hajra, 1/8th to Mst. Muneera and the remainder to the minor daughter, Regarding the pensionary and other benefits the parties can claim the same as per the relevant rules applicable. The provisions of Succession Certificate Act cannot be invoked for any amount of arrears, etc. which were not existing at the time of death of the deceased. The succession certificate provisions are applicable only to the debts and securities left behind by the deceased at the time of his death. A succession certificate is accordingly ordered to be issued in favour of the parties after Indemnity bond with sureties as warranted under the provisions of Succession Certificates Act is furnished. The petition is accordingly disposed of.� 7. Aggrieved thereby the appellant through the instant appeal assails the same on the ground that trial Court did not conduct the matter in strict accordance with direction of this Court as passed in the appellate order of 30-4-2004 and instead of specifying the amounts to be covered by Succession Certificate fully and extending it to the whole gamut of debts, again left the matter half baked compelling the appellant to initiate the present round of litigation, particularly because respondent Muneera being a divorces was not entitled to any share out of the debts etc. The respondents have not filed any rejoinder and during course of arguments while appellants counsel besides elucidating the grounds taken in the appeal has also offered that appellants 1 and 2 were prepared to forego their share under Succession Certificate in favour of the minor daughter of deceased the counsel for respondents has contended that appellants have throughout acted mala fide to prevent the respondent from receiving her share of benefits under succession certificate issued by PDJ Srinagar. 8. I have heard Ld. Counsel and considered the matter. 8. I have heard Ld. Counsel and considered the matter. Before proceeding ahead 11 would be appropriate to point out certain discrepancies existing in the original proceedings even though they stand rectified by efflux of time and conduct of the parties. First, that the amount of the debts securities is mentioned as Rupees ninety three thousand, five hundred in PDJ™s order of 22-5-2002 but only as Rupees seventy three thousand, five hundred in the Succession Certificate issued subsequently which, however, tallies with the amount mentioned in the memo of petition in view whereof the wrong amount mentioned in the original order aforesaid stands automatically rectified, Secondly, neither respondents application for arraying her as party in the proceedings has formally been disposed of, nor has her incomplete statement as recorded on 3 x 1998 been completed even though as per note on last page of the statement she has been discharged without having been cross-examined. However, since respondent has already been considered while passing orders on grant of Succession Certificate she automatically stands arrayed as party even in absence of a formal order to that effect. Regarding her incomplete statement the appellant also has not at any level till now agitated anything on that count and has not claimed to have been prejudiced thereby. The statement has as such been deemed to be complete by the trial Court. Both these features of the matter, therefore, stand closed by efflux of time, flow of proceedings, merger of orders, and conduct of the parties, and accordingly do not deserve to be considered at this stage. 9. Now, as things presently stand, for limited purpose of the proceedings under Succession Certificates Act the deceased has been held and without any challenge, to be survived by his parents, the appellants Nos. 1 and 2, respondent, as his widow, and Qura-ul-Ain as the only child and with that the array of beneficiaries under the succession certificate stands complete along with their shares as fixed in the impugned order. The only area of controversy is the exact description of debts/securities required to be covered thereunder and extension of the certificate to other debts securities not mentioned originally. The only area of controversy is the exact description of debts/securities required to be covered thereunder and extension of the certificate to other debts securities not mentioned originally. So far as the question of extension of the certificate is concerned it perhaps cant be controverted, in view of the clear provision of Section 10 Succession Certificates Act, wherein certificates granted thereunder can be extended to such debts securities as were not originally specified therein. Such extensions would have such effect as if the debts/securities to which the certificate is extended were originally specified therein. That limits the question only to the debts/securities those would be covered by the Succession Certificate in the instant case. 10. Before addressing that aspect it would be appropriate to notice that in terms, the Succession Certificates Act 1977 (1920-A.D.) is meant to facilitate collection of debts on succession and the word debt according to sub-sec. (2) of Section 4 thereof includes any debt except rent and Revenue or profits payable in respect of land used for agricultural purposes. Ordinarily thus it would follow that succession certificates can be issued in respect of all those debts/securities which were payable to the deceased and against which his successors would be entitled to seek a decree on the basis of title of the deceased thereto. Under Section 6(1)(e) the seeker of certificate is, among other things, required to specifically mention debts and securities in respect of which the certificate is applied for. By necessary implication it, therefore, follows that a Succession Certificate to be issued under the Act would only cover the debts/ securities payable to the deceased, and not other items of his inheritable properties not claimable as debt payable to the deceased, because they devolve upon successors without judicial intervention unless a dispute arises, under the Succession law ordinarily applicable. That being so any amount that comes into being after death of the deceased or as a consequence thereof not originally claimable by the deceased as a debt would be beyond the scope of a certificate required to be issued under the Act. 11. That being so any amount that comes into being after death of the deceased or as a consequence thereof not originally claimable by the deceased as a debt would be beyond the scope of a certificate required to be issued under the Act. 11. In the instant case, the original application specifies the debts/securities regarding which the certificate was prayed for, as the gratuity of forty thousand rupees, one years salary of the deceased amounting to rupees Twenty four thousand, G.P. Fund of rupees six thousand, and an amount of rupees thirty five hundred lying in account of the deceased with J & K Bank Soura under Account No. 3421135, regarding which the Certificate stands already issued in terms of the PDJ™s order of 22-5-2000. The issuance of certificate regarding all these amounts has never been objected to by any of the parties and to that extent the matter is quite settled. It is only the pensionary benefits from 3-11-1995 onwards, inclusion whereof in the Succession Certificate is in dispute. While appellant seeks to have them included in the certificate and shared by parties in the proportion fixed for other debts, the respondent lays exclusive claim thereto under Pension Rules as widow of the deceased. Thus it is the pensionary benefits only, that is in the dispute, as to who under pension rules is entitled to receive or share them, in view of the claimed status of respondent Muneera as widow of the deceased which otherwise then for the limited purpose of the Succession Certificate unsettled, in view of appellant™s allegation that she is a divorcee. In other words, therefore, except for the pensionary benefits the Succession Certificate as issued by PDJ, subsequent to his order on 22-5-2000 stands finally confirmed and its extension to other amounts of the description as mentioned therein being lawfully provided for under Section 10 cannot be disputed in the very terms of the Act. So far as pensionary benefits due in lieu of the death of concerned deceased is concerned they plainly cannot be deemed to be covered by the Succession Certificates Act and the certificate as such can, therefore, not extend to include them. 12. So far as pensionary benefits due in lieu of the death of concerned deceased is concerned they plainly cannot be deemed to be covered by the Succession Certificates Act and the certificate as such can, therefore, not extend to include them. 12. In view of all that has been discussed above the appeal is disposed of in following terms : (a) The Succession Certificate already issued in the matter may on application of any of the holders thereof be extended to all debts/securities other than pensionary benefits payable in lieu of the death of Khuda Baksh Rasti aforementioned, as claimable by holders of the certificate in accordance with procedure prescribed under the Act. (b) The amounts specified in the certificate already issued including the debts to which the certificate may be extended, shall be deposited by all concerned debtors in the PDJ™s Court at Srinagar within a month from now, whereafter the concerned Court shall disburse it to the parties in accordance with law and the ratio fixed in the certificate in terms thereof. (c) The share of minor Qurat-ul-Ain shall be kept in the bank to be operated by her lawful guardian, or any other person so authorised by the Court only with prior leave of the Court. (d) The amount of pension payable as aforesaid shall be determined by the concerned department within said period of one month and details thereof furnished to the Court of Principal District Judge Srinagar who shall thereafter determine the title of parties to receive the same jointly or severally in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the matter. The determination as such shall be done by the concerned Principal District Judge as if trying an interpleader suit on reference by the concerned department paying the pension. (e) All Civil suits and other litigation whatsoever between the parties pending in any Court in Srinagar or elsewhere shall stand transferred to the Court of Principal District Judge Srinagar, who shall try them together for a composite disposal of all limbs of the conflict existing between the parties who, in their own interest particularly the minor would be well advised to shed a little of their litigative zeal and behave more severely. 13. The appeal stands accordingly disposed of. Copies of this order be provided to the parties free of costs and one placed on the Subordinate file to be sent down without delay.