The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for sufficient evidence to conclusively prove the claim of legal heirship, and the appellate court's decision to grant liberty to both parties to approach the competent civil court for adjudication.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

2. This Civil Revision Application is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 04-03-2011 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 119 of 2007 passed by the District Judge-5 Aurangabad. The revision applicants herein filed M.A.R.J.I. No. 188 of 2006 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kannad. The facts stated in the M.A.R.J.I. No.188 of 2006 are reproduced herein below for ready reference.

"1. That, the Prakash s/o Shahadu Telure (hereinafter referred the deceased) died on dt.23-10-2005 at village Kannad, Tq.Kannad Dist. Aurangabad.

2. That the ordinary and permanent residence of deceased at the time of death was at Bhimnagar, Kannad Tq. Kannad Dist. Aurangabad.

3. That the deceased had left the following members of the family :

4. That, the petitioners No. 1 to 3 are the legal heirs of the deceased, besides them, there is no other successors legal representatives to the deceased. As such the petitioners are entitled for heirship certificate as prayed. The dseceased was governed by the Hindu Law.

5. That the deceased has left no will, no application has been made for grant of letters of administration of the deceased.

6. That, there is no impediment U/sec. 370 or other provisions of the Indian Succession Act and any other enactment to grant of the certificate or to the validity thereof when granted.

7. That, the deceased was in service in the Revenue Office, Kannad under Deputy Collector, Sillod and working as a Talathi. He was died on the duty on dt. 23.10.2005. The petitioner NO. 1 would have been chances to get service on compassionate basis from the concerned department and to get official all benefits.

8. That, the petitioners when approached to the concerned Authority of department and requested to them to give benefits of compassionate basis, that time the concerned Authority has directed to the petitioner to obtain the legal heirship certificate from court for the above purpose.

9. That, the legal heirship certificate may kindly be issued in the name of the above petitioners."

3. The Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kannad passed the following order.

"Petitioner moved this application for heirship certificate.

A notice was published in local daily newspaper 'Tarun Bharat' calling anybody to raise objection if any within one month of the date of publication of the notice. In response of publication of said notice objector Mandanbai Prakash Telure and other appeared and filed objection at Exh. 14. Thus, this position is become contentious.

Learned advocate S.K. Shejwal argued that the objector appeared beyond the period mentioned in the notice and on this point he submitted for discarding the objection. However, I found no substance in such argument, because though the objector appeared beyond the period mentioned in the notice, yet in the interest of justice an opportunity must be given to objector to contest the application.

Since the petition is become contentious it needs to be sent to Hon'ble Civil Judge (S.D.) Aurangabad. Hence in view of Chapter XIV para 304 & 305 of Civil Manual, the petition be transferred to Hon'ble Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad."

4. On 23-03-2007 the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad after considering the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the application filed by the revision applicants and issued certificate.

5. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 23-03-2007 respondent No. 2 herein Mandanbai filed Regular Civil Appeal No. 119 of 2007 before the Court of the District Judge-5 Aurangabad.

The District Judge5, Aurangabad allowed the appeal filed by Mandanbai and quashed and set aside the order dated 23-03-2007 holding that there is no satisfactory evidence about the ceremonies of marriages and there is no evidence to show whose marriage took place first.

6. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by