Interest on delayed settlement dues is payable from submission of the succession certificate, not the date of death.

Dhunni Lal, an employee working as a Gateman under the Northern Railway, died on 9 October 2002. The applicant, his nephew, claimed Dhunni Lal’s settlement dues on the basis of a Will dated 18 June 1998. As the applicant was not nominated in the service records and Radheyshyam also claimed to be Dhunni Lal’s son and sole legal heir, the Railway authorities required the applicant to obtain a succession certificate.

The applicant’s initial suit was dismissed for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. In a subsequent Suit No. 09/2016, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Raebareli, ruled in the applicant’s favour on 24 December 2018 and issued a succession certificate on the same date. The applicant submitted the judgment and succession certificate to the respondents on 25 March 2019, followed by reminders dated 20 May 2019, 4 June 2019 and 3 February 2020.

The respondents paid the provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment and group insurance amounts in December and November 2020, respectively. The applicant thereafter sought interest on the delayed payments, payment of approximately ₹52,000 towards OLI/death insurance, and ₹1,900 mentioned in the succession certificate. Pursuant to an earlier Tribunal order dated 13 December 2024 directing consideration of his representation, the respondents rejected the claim on 4 June 2025. The applicant challenged that rejection in the present Original Application.

Whether the applicant was entitled to interest on the delayed payment of Dhunni Lal’s settlement dues, and, if so, from what date?

Whether the respondents were liable to pay the claimed amount of approximately ₹52,000 towards OLI/death insurance?

Whether the applicant was entitled to the amount of ₹1,900 described as family pension in the succession certificate?

The Tribunal applied the principle that interest may be awarded on retiral or settlement dues where delay in payment is attributable to the employer, but no such liability arises for a period during which payment was legitimately withheld because of uncertainty regarding the claimant’s entitlement or the requirement to obtain a succession certificate.

The Tribunal further applied the extant pension rules governing eligibility for family pension, holding that a succession certificate by itself does not establish entitlement to family pension.

Claims for additional insurance or other benefits must also be established under the applicable service and insurance rules and cannot be granted merely because they are asserted by the claimant.

The Tribunal held that the respondents were justified in requiring a succession certificate because the applicant was not recorded as a nominee and there was a rival claim by Radheyshyam, who claimed to be Dhunni Lal’s son and legal heir.

Consequently, the delay from Dhunni Lal’s death in 2002 until the applicant obtained and submitted the succession certificate could not be attributed to the respondents.

However, once the applicant submitted the succession certificate and supporting judgment on 25 March 2019, the respondents were responsible for processing and releasing the admitted settlement dues. The subsequent delay, including the time taken to seek clarification regarding the variation between “Mohan Lal” and “Mohan Lal Yadav,” was attributable to the respondents in the circumstances of the case.

The Tribunal therefore awarded interest from 26 March 2019, rather than from 10 October 2002. The claim for ₹1,900 was rejected because the applicant was not a family member entitled to family pension under the applicable rules. The claim for approximately ₹52,000 was also rejected because the applicant failed to establish entitlement under the relevant rules and the amount was not covered by the succession certificate.

The respondents were directed to pay interest on the settlement dues already paid to the applicant—comprising provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment and group insurance—at the applicable bank rate from 26 March 2019 until the respective actual dates of payment, within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order.

The claims for interest from 10 October 2002, approximately ₹52,000 towards OLI/death insurance, and ₹1,900 towards family pension were not granted.

The connected Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.