GOWRAMMA AND ORS. Vs. K. SAVITHRAMMA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the respondents in M A No.12/2009 being aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Maddur, allowing the said appeal and ordering for grant of succession certificate in favour of appellants therein. The said Misc. Appeal was directed as against the common judgment passed in P & SC Nos.5 & 6 of 2007 filed under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act seeking succession certificate. By the judgment and decree dated 21.3.2009 the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) & J.M.F.C., Maddur was pleased to allow P & SC No.6/2007 and dismiss P & SC No.5/2007.

(2.) The facts of the case to be stated in brief are that petitioners in P & SC No.5/2007 sought succession certificate on the ground that they are the legally wedded wife and son of T.C. Nagaraju who was working as Physical Education Instructor in Government School, K Honnalagere village, Maddur Taluk. The deceased Nagaraju died while in service on 4.3.2007 leaving behind them as his legal heirs. The petitioners required the succession certificate to claim the death benefits of T.C. Nagaraju.

(3.) On the other hand, the petitioners in P & SC No.6/2007 sought the succession certificate on the ground that the deceased Nagaraju married the petitioner No.1 on 12.12.1982 at Mangaji Meese Lakshmi Dandosa Choultry, Gavipura Guttahalli, Bangalore and out of the said wedlock 2nd petitioner was born on 10.9.1983. However, after three of marriage, the relationship between the petitioners and deceased Nagaraju was broken because of dowry harassment and petitioners started staying at her parents house. Without dissolving the marriage tie with the first petitioner, the deceased contacted the 2nd marriage with the petitioner No.1 in P & SC No.5/2007 and out of the said wedlock 2nd petitioner therein was born. The petitioners herein claimed maintenance in C.Misc.3/88 as against the deceased which was allowed at the rate of Rs.300 and Rs.200 respectively and after petitioner No.2 attained majority petitioner No.1 was receiving monthly maintenance of Rs.800/- from deceased Nagaraju. The petitioners claimed they are the legal heirs of Nagaraju and they are alone entitled to the death benefits of Nagaraju.