1. The aspect which the court is called upon to consider is whether the Petitioner Snehala Pramod Desai, who is the widow of the deceased, is liable to pay ad valorem court fee upon the securities shown in the petition which are sought to be transferred to the names of the Petitioner as also the other heirs under the Succession Certificate applied for by the Petitioner.

2. The Petitioner is the widow of the deceased who is one of the heirs alongwith her two married daughters. Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner stated that only the Petitioner has applied for waiver/exemption of court fee on the ground that she is a woman and that the securities will be used for her maintenance.

3. The Petition has been filed simplicitor for issue of succession certificate in respect of the securities left by the deceased husband of the Petitioner. The Petitioner has not stated or substantiated that the Petitioner, as the widow, is not able to otherwise maintain herself.

4. It is settled position in law that a woman is entitled to waiver/exemption of court fee only in respect of applications for maintenance in matrimonial disputes or with regard to divorce and family law matters and not for property disputes.

5. The securities mentioned in the petition is the moveable property left by the deceased. There is no dispute with regard to that property. The Petitioner, as also her two married daughters, are entitled to an equal share in the estate of the deceased. The Petitioner would be entitled to the securities upon the death of the deceased and upon administration of his estate.

6. Since the Petition is in respect of only the securities, the Petitioner has not applied for Probate or Letters of Administration of the deceased but only for the issue of Succession Certificate U/s. 370 of the Indian Succession Act. Upon the certificate being issued in the form specified in the schedule VIII, the Petitioner would be empowered to receive interest and dividends thereon U/s.374 (a) of the Indian Succession Act (ISA). The Petitioner would, therefore, be liable to deposit the sum equal to fee payable under the court fees act 1870 (and later Bombay Court Fees Act, 1957) as applicable U/s.379 (1) of the ISA. The fact of the succession certificate being issued would be conclusive against the companies in which the deceased held the share and securities U/s.381 of the ISA. Any party aggrieved by the issue of the certificate would be entitled to apply for revocation of the certificate U/s.383 of the ISA. The order passed herein would be liable to appeal U/s.384 of the ISA.

7. It is upon the aforesaid provisions of law that the Petition has been filed.

8. It is settled position in law (See Judgment in Testamentary Petition (L.) No.118 of 2007 of Bombay High Court in Girish Kanaiyalal Munshi Vs. Sudha Girish Munshi & Anr.) that property disputes relating to the grant of probate or Letters of Administration are not exempted from the payment of Court fees even if they are filed by female litigants.

9. The aforesaid provisions show that the petition for issue of succession certificate is no different from the provisions under which the probate or Letters of Administration are granted. A reading of the aforesaid provisions makes this position clear. The Petition for Succession Certificate may be filed only because the probate or Letter of Administration would not be applied for since it is not in respect of immoveable property left by the deceased. The Petitioner is liable to pay court fees in such petition also. An application is to be similarly made showing similar particulars in the prescribed format. The fact of the certificate being issued is similar to the provision of the Probate or Letters of Administration with regard to the third party concerned with the estate of the deceased. The revocation of the certificate is also upon similar grounds and an appeal is provided from the order passed in such petition.

10. There is, therefore, no reason why