1. By this revision the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed by the District Judge1, Akola in Regular Civil Appeal No.35/2011 on 03.02.2014 is challenged. By the impugned the learned First Appellate Court has set aside the order passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Akola in M.J.C. No.335/2009 on 17.08.2011 rejecting the application for grant of succession certificate in favour of respondent herein and directed to issue succession certificate in the name of present applicants and also in the name of respondent Lata Sapkal.

2. Brief facts of the revision can be stated as follows:

Respondent herein has filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of succession certificate in respect of the service benefits and dues of her deceased husband Bhalchandra. According to her, she was married with Bhalchandra on 31.03.2007 and the said marriage was also registered. Deceased Bhalchandra was serving in the Police Department as Assistant Sub-Inspector at the time of his death on 08.07.2009 at Akola. He has left behind the respondent and also the present appellant Nos.1 and 2 who are his sons and applicant No.3, the married daughter from his first wife Kalpana. It was her case that as Police Department was not ready to give her share in the service benefits of deceased Bhalchandra, she was constrained to ask for the succession certificate.

3. The applicants resisted her application contending inter alia that respondent is not in any way entitled for the succession certificate as she is not legally wedded wife of their father. It was submitted that their father Bhalchandra has performed the marriage with their mother Kalpana in the year 1980, whereas the respondent had married with one Narayan Trambak Sabale. She had two sons from Narayan Sabale, born on 12.05.1990 and 02.11.1992 respectively. After the death of her husband Narayan Sable on 13.03.2006, all his movable and immovable property devolved upon the respondent. Till today in the record respondent's name is continued as the wife of Narayan Sable and in such situation, it was contended, she cannot be entitled to get succession certificate in respect of the service dues of their father. Hence, they are alone entitled to get succession certificate.

4. In support of her claim respondent examined herself; one witness by name Rajendra Mune in whose house she was residing on rent along with deceased Bhalchandra and one more witness by name Ramakant Mallekar to prove that he was present at the time of her marriage with Bhalchandra. She has, further produced on record other documentary evidence by calling upon one Mr. Gajanan Shriram Ingale from police headquarter to prove the service record of Bhalchandra. As against it, the applicant No.1 examined himself and also lead the evidence of the brother of the deceased namely, Ashok Sapkal and Dr. Waghela.

5. On appreciation of this evidence, the learned Trial Court was pleased to reject the application filed by the respondent and allowed the claim of the applicants for succession certificate.

6. Being aggrieved, the respondent herein preferred an appeal before the District Court and the District Court has reversed the finding recorded by the Trial Court and held both the parties entitled for the succession certificate to get the service dues of deceased Bhalchandra.

7. This judgment and order of the Trial Court of First Appellate Court is challenged in this revision by learned counsel for applicants by submitting that there is absolutely no evidence on record to prove that respondent was the legally wedded wife of deceased. Her pleadings are conspicuously silent as to when, where and in which manner she got married with deceased Bhalchandra. The registration certificate of the alleged marriage cannot be a proof of the legality and validity of marriage. Moreover the date of the marriage mentioned in the registration certificate is also not correct. It is urged, that in evidence before the