Smt. Fooli Devi vs Smt. Keli Devi and Others

Alok Sharma, J.—This misc. appeal u/s 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter ''the Act of 1925'') seeks to impugn the judgment dated 27.9.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Ajmer (hereinafter ''the trial court'') modifying an earlier succession certificate issued by the court and to include therein the respondents No. 1 to 3 Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti (hereinafter ''the respondents'') as the daughters of deceased Prahlad with his relationship with one Smt. Ganga.

FACTS:

One Prahlad expired on 11.9.1990 leaving behind a fixed deposit of Rs. 40,000/- in a bank. His then living wife Smt. Phooli Devi-obtained a succession certificate on 4.3.1991 on an application filed u/s 372 of the Act of 1925 in case No. 123/1990. However, when Smt. Phooli Devi approached the Bank it transpired that one Smt. Keli Devi also claiming to be the daughter of the deceased Prahlad had obtained a similar certificate u/s 372 of the Act of 1925 in case No. 15/1991 on 2.4.1991. In these circumstances Smt. Phooli Devi filed an application u/s 383 of the Act of 1925 for cancellation of the certificate issued to Smt. Keli Devi on 3.7.1991. This application was registered as 66/1991. Keli Devi''s case on her part sought cancellation of succession certificate dated 4.3.1991 issued to Smt. Phooli Devi. This was numbered 66/1991. Smt. Keli Devi''s case was that Smt. Phooli Devi was divorced from deceased Prahlad 30 years prior to his death and thereafter, deceased Prahlad had married her mother Smt. Ganga Devi. From the marriage three daughters namely; Smt. Keli devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. chhoti had been borne to Ganga Devi and they alone following Smt. Ganga''s death entitled to succession certificate.

The learned trial court in these circumstances clubbed the two applications No. 48/1991 field by Smt. Phooli Devi and 66/1991 filed by Smt. Keli Devi. Smt. Phooli Devi expired during the proceedings and was substituted by her natural born daughter Smt. Memi Bai from her marriage with Prahlad.

On consideration of the matter vide impugned order dated 27.9.2000 the trial court held that Smt. Memi Bai as also the respondents Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti were all the daughters of Prahlad by his marriage with Smt. Phooli Devi in the first instance (qua Smt. Memi Devi) and thereafter relationship with Smt. Ganga Devi from which with three daughters namely; Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti were born. In these circumstances the trial court directed that all the four daughters of Prahlad were entitled to a succession certificate to an extent of 1/4th share each.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Smt. Memi Devi has filed this appeal u/s 384 of the Act of 1925.

Miss Gayatri Rathore, counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order dated 27.9.2000 is liable to be set aside on the ground that there was no evidence of any probative worth before the trial court to hold that the respondents namely; Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti were borne out of Ganga Devi''s relationship with Prahlad. I find no substance in the arguments made in the face of evidence before the trial court. The learned trial court has held that in Prahlad''s Medical Railway Card (Ex. A/4), Smt. Ganga Devi''s name was indicated as his wife and not Smt. Phooli Devi''s. The trial court further found that in Prahlad''s the ration card (Ex. A/5) Smt. Phooli Devi''s name was absent and was that of Smt. Memi Devi. The trial court also noted that PW3 Smt. Jamari Bai the mother of Prahlad had admitted that at the time of her death Prahlad was living with Smt. Ganga who in-fact was maintaining her. The trial court thus on consideration of positive evidence on record both oral and documentary came to the conclusion that the respondents Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti were the daughters of Prahlad borne out of his relationship with Smt. Ganga and this was established on preponderance of probability. The trial court found on the other hand the evidence led before it on behalf of the appellant applicant was suspect and evasive and only sought to rely upon the fact that there was no evidence of formal marriage between Prahlad and Smt. Ganga. In the context of the need of a valid marriage the learned trial court referred to section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter ''the Act of 1955'') where-under even illegitimate children borne to a person were entitled to be treated as legitimate qua his own estate. In these circumstances the learned trial court found that Smt. Memi Bai and Smt. Keli Devi, Smt. Kamla and Smt. Chhoti-all being the children of deceased Prahlad from relationship with Phooli Devi as his wife and Smt. Ganga as his consort were entitled to succession certificate to the extent of 1/4th share each.

Interference in appeals are not for the askance. The appellant is required to point out error on law or on fact for the impugned order passed by the trial court to be set aside. No such situation obtains in the present case. The conclusions of the trial court are based on reasonable appreciation of evidence led before it and obtaining law. The order impugned is neither perverse nor vitiated in law.

I find no force in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.