KAMLA DEVI Vs. SUMAN RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgement of mine will dispose of two regular second appeals being RSA-2750-2024 and RSA-2755-2024.

(2.) In the present appeals, the judgment and order passed by the trial Court on September 24, 2018 and the Common Judgement passed by the Lower Appellate Courts on July 31, 2024 have been challenged. Petition No. 16 of 2015 was filed by the respondent No.l widow for grant of Succession Certificate in her favour for receiving the death benefits of her husband. The trial Court following the rules of intestacy directed the benefits to be divided equally between mother and wife. The petitioner-widow in CIS (Civil Appeal) No.348 of 2018 challenged the said order of trial Court. In CIS No.343 of 2018, the mother-appellant also challenged the order of trial Court.

(3.) Upon institution of petition under Sec. 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, notice of the petition was issued in newspapers. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent No.2 to file objections so the judgment proceeded against ex parte against respondent No.2. Upon notice the mother being the respondent No.l in the Sec. 372 petition and the appellant herein appeared and filed a detailed written statement. The appellant submitted that the wife-respondent No.l was the murderer of her husband and was not entitled to get Succession Certificate in her favour. The husband of the respondent No.l-wife died on December 17, 2014. FIR No.31 dated February 25, 2015 under Ss. 323, 341, 147, 148 and 306 IPC, P.S. Julana was lodged against her. It was pending investigation when the succession case was filed. It was the contention of the appellant that since the respondent No.l-wife murdered her husband therefore, the Succession Certificate should not be granted in favour of the wife and should record that the mother was the only heir. It is only the mother who was entitled to GPF, Gratuity, Pension and all other service benefits accruing from the service of her deceased son. The learned trial Court allowed both the parties to lead their evidence.