Rajiv Roy, J.—The two appeals vide M.A. No.190 of 2010 and M.A. No.215 of 2012 have been preferred by the appellant herein against the common order and judgment dated 26.06.2009 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, IV, Patna in Succession Case No.115 of 2002 (Smt. Nutan Singh vs. The Estate of Late Shankar Sharan Singh) and Succession Case No.123 of 2002 (Bibha Kumar Singh @ Bibha Singh & Vivek Singh vs. Estate of Late Shankar Sharan Singh) respectively by which while the appeal preferred by appellant herein (Succession Case No.115 of 2002) was dismissed, the Succession Case No.123 of 2002 (preferred by the respondent Bibha Kumari Singh) was allowed.

2. The matrix of facts giving rise to the present appeal is/are as follows:

Succession Case No.115 of 2002

3. As per the appellant, she married Late Shankar Sharan Singh on 07.06.1985. Her husband, an Assistant with the Sub-Jail, Barh, Patna became traceless on 20.07.1995. With the passage of time and as seven years lapsed, it was presumed under the law that he is no more.

4. He left behind the appellant herein and a minor daughter, Shubhra Shree who was born in the year 1988. Her husband, being a Government servant and as she was entitled for the pension, a Succession Certificate under Section 370 of the Indian Succession Act (henceforth for short ‘the Act’) was needed.

5. Accordingly, the Succession Case No.115 of 2002 was preferred.

6. The lady, respondent no.2, Bibha Kumari Singh appeared in the said succession case and opposed the prayer.

Succession Case No.123 of 2002

7. The case of Bibha Kumari Singh (respondent no.2) in Succession Case No.123 of 2002 was that her husband, Shankar Sharan Singh while posted in Sub-Jail, Barh as an Assistant went missing on 20.07.1995 whereafter the aforesaid appellant, Nutan Singh, presenting herself as his wife and in collusion with the local offices got the initial compensation of Rs.27,000/- from the Government and also filed Succession Case.

8. Her further case was that she married Shankar Sharan Singh on 17.05.1987 and the couple was blessed with a son, Gajanand Singh @ Vivek Singh in the year 1998. She submitted joint photographs of the couple as also the joint Bank Account of Punjab National Bank, Neura Branch, Patna with her husband to show her bonafide. She further named Most. Prema Kumari, mother of Late Shankar Sharan Singh as her relative. She as such preferred the Succession Case No.123 of 2002 for succession certificate.

9. The two matters were taken up by the learned court together.

10. In Succession Case No.115 of 2002, Nutan Singh put forward five witnesses which were as follows:—

(i) AW.1-Nutan Singh the appellant herself;

(ii) AW.1-Ram Bahadur Singh, father of the Appellant;

(iii) AW.3–Rajo Thakur, the Barber;

(iv) AW.4–Nunu Babu Rai Choudhary, a co-villager;

(v) AW.5–Awadhesh Choudhary, Uncle of the Appellant;

11. The documents that were produced by way of exhibits were:—

(i) Ext.1- certified copy of the Complaint Case No.379(c) of 2001;

(ii) Ext.1/A – certified copy of the order sheet of T.P.S. No. 292 of 2000;

(iii) Ext.2 -formal FIR of Gardanibagh P.S.520 of 1998.

12. AW.1, Nutan Singh claimed that her husband never married Bibha Kumari Singh and the case filed by her is false and concocted. According to the claim, her marriage took place at ‘Goenka Dharamshala’, Munger. It was her further claim that she was residing in a house which is registered in the name of Prema Kumari (mother of Late Shankar Sharan Singh) and is also paying the tax of the said house. She denied the claim that the case has been filed to grab the property of Late Shankar Sharan Singh.

13. AW.2, the Father of the appellant herein was also examined and according to him, his daughter was married on 17.06.1985 and out of the wedlock, a daughter was born. He also denied the marriage of Bibha Kumari Singh with Shankar Sharan Singh.

14. AW.3 is the Barber, Rajo Thakur and according to him, Nutan was married at ‘Goenka Dharamshala’, Munger in which he had