( 1 ) WHEN the vacate petition is taken up for hearing both the parties requested to dispose of the main appeal. At their request, cma itself is taken up for hearing. Heard both sides.

( 2 ) THE unsuccessful petitioner in the court below preferred this CMA against the order and decree dated 06-10-2004 passed in O. P. No. 373 of 2001 by the I Additional district Judge, Karimnagar.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts shorn of details for disposal of appeal lies in a narrow compass and briefly stated as under: the petitioner is undisputedly first wife of the deceased Mylarapu Rayamallu who was an employee of Singareni Collieries company Limited, Godavarikhani till his death on 21-12-1997. He left behind the appellant/petitioner and his mother, who died on 08-07-2001. On the death of Rayamallu, appellant/petitioner approached the controlling Authority under Payment of gratuity Act for payment of gratuity amount in Claim Application No. 20/99 and the same was adjudicated in favour of the appellant/ petitioner against which 1st respondent herein filed appeal before the appellate authority. Pending the same 1st respondent also filed a suit-O. S. No. 73 of 1999 before the Junior Civil Judge, Peddapalli seeking a declaration that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased Rayamallu, which was dismissed for non-deposit of process and no steps were taken for restoration. After adjudicating the claim of gratuity in favour of the appellant/petitioner, 1 st respondent filed o. P. No. 559 of 2000 before the I Additional district Judge, Karimnagar for succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act without impleading the. appellant/petitioner and mother of late Rayamallu and obtained succession certificate in the said O. P. to receive the terminal benefits amounting to rs. 3,09,371/ -. On coming to know that the 1st respondent obtained succession certificate, appellant/petitioner filed O. P. No. 373 of 2001 before the I Additional district Judge, Karimnagar under section 383 (b) and (c) of the Indian succession Act for revoking the succession certificate granted in favour of the 1st respondent in O. P. No. 559 of 2000 dated 12-2-2001 stating that the 1st respondent has obtained the said succession certificate by misrepresenting the court and without impleading the parties likely to be affected by granting the said certificate. The 1st respondent resisted the petition by filing a counter stating that she has not misrepresented the facts nor did she play any fraud in obtaining the succession certificate. She got published the notification in the newspaper as directed by the Court and the appellant/petitioner did not come forward with any objection. in view of the same, the lower court rightly granted succession certificate in her favour after satisfying with the documents furnished by her. it was further stated by her that the appellant/petitioner took customary divorce from the deceased on 16-01-1983 and later married Doddipalli Mallaiah and was living with him and gave birth to children through the said Mallaiah. After obtairvipg such customary divorce, deceased married the 1st respondent and was living with her and her name was entered in the list of family members in the family medical attendance book, ration card issued by the Mandal revenue Officer, Ramagundam and her name was nominated for all the terminal benefits. On the death of deceased, singareni Collieries Company Limited paid a sum of Rs. 35,540/- by way of cheque to the 1 st respondent and she vacated the quarter and handed over the same after the death of the deceased. Basing upon the above pleadings the learned District Judge framed the following points for trial. (1) Whether the petitioner is the divorced wife of the deceased mylavarapu Rayamallu? (2) Whether the succession certificate granted in O. P. No. 559 of 2000 is liable to be revoked?

( 4 ) TO prove the case of the parties, appellant/petitioner herself was examined as p. W. 1 and got marked Exs. A-1 to