(1.) This revision petition is arising against the judgment and order dated 29-6-91 passed by the District Judge-cum-Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shillong in succession certificate Misc. Case No. 43(T)/86. After the demise of her husband this present revision petitioner filed an application for grant of Succession Certificate in respect of the death of her late husband John Oris Foster Blah on 30-5-86 in the Court of the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner of East Khasi Hills, Shillong. The husband of the revision petitioner died on 8-4-86. It is alleged that the opposite party who claimed to be the wife of the deceased filed an application for Succession Certificate on 29-5-86 in the Court of the District Judge-cum-Additional Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Mills, Shillong. Subsequently, records of the case filed before the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner has been called upon by the District Judge and both the cases were amalgamated and it was registered as Misc. Case No.43(7)/86. After hearing both the parties the learned District Judge issued Succession Certificate in favour of the revision petitioner and the opposite party as successor wives of the deceased. Being aggrieved the present revision petitioner has filed this revision petition.
(2.) Revision petitioner claims that she is the legally married wife of the deceased and in support of the marriage she produced the marriage certificate, which is enclosed as Annexure 'A' to this revision petition (exhibits before the lower Court). It is further contended that this marriage was never dissolved at the instance of either by the petitioner or by the deceased husband of the petitioner during his lifetime and that till the death of the husband the marriage existed.
(3.) The respondent's claim is that she is the wife of the deceased late John Dris Foster Blah. The petitioner is the deserted wife of deceased husband. The petitioner deserted late foster Blah in 1967 and since then the late Foster Blah was living with the respondent opposite party as husband and wife and 4 children has been born out of this cohabitation. The evidence on record shows that 4 witnesses were examined on behalf of the respondent And 3 witnesses from the side of the petitioner in the trial.