ORDER :

1. This Revision has been preferred against the order dated 9.11.2017 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No.27/2016 by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir Champa, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner for dismissal of the petition filed under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 was dismissed.

2. Facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 before the Civil Judge, Class-1, Sakti, which was registered as Succession Case No.13/2014 (Mahettar Vs. Karmihin & Others). As per the pedigree, petitioner’s grandfather Awadhram was the cousin brother of deceased Mangluram. Mangluram died on 2.5.2014 and he was unmarried. The deceased was working at Nagar Palika, Kharsiya and also opened Account No.10759572134 at SBI, Kharsiya in which salary of the deceased was being deposited. At the time of death, Rs.96,622/-was deposited in the said account. As the petitioner had taken care of the deceased during his life time and also performed last rituals, he preferred a petition for grant of succession certificate in his favour to obtain the said amount. Non-Applicant No.2 Munni Bai is the real sister of the applicant whereas Non-Applicants No.1 & 3 namely, Karmihin & Shanti Bai are also cousin sister of the applicant. No-one has opposed the petition of the applicant and the non-applicants remained ex-parte.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the trial Court after hearing the parties has wrongly dismissed his application because the applicant is the only legal heir, as per the Hindu Succession Act. So learned counsel prays to allow the Revision and set aside the impugned order.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order of the Court below.

5. The property of the male Hindu dying intestate is governed by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which reads thus:-

“8. General rules of succession in the case of males.-The property of a male Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the provisions of this Chapter—

(a) firstly, upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class I of the Schedule;

(b) secondly, if there is no heir of class I, then upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class II of the Schedule;

(c) thirdly, if there is no heir of any of the two classes, then upon the agnates of the deceased; and

(d) lastly, if there is no agnate, then upon the cognates of the deceased.”

6. Class-II heirs according to Section 8 of the Schedule of the said Act is as under:-

“Class-II

I. Father.

II. (1) Son’s daughter’s son, (2) son’s daughter’s daughter, (3) brother, (4) sister.

III. (1) daughter’s son’s son, (2) daughter’s son’s daughter, (3) daughter’s daughter’s son, (4) daughter’s daughter’s daughter.

IV (1) brother’s son, (2) sister’s son, (3) brother’s daughter, (4) sister’s daughter.

V. father’s father; father’s mother.

VI. father’s widow; brother’s widow.

VII. father’s brother; father’s sister.

VIII. mother’s father; mother’s mother.

IX. mother’s brother; mother’s sister.

Explanation.-In this Schedule, references to a brother or sister do not include references to a brother or sister by uterine blood.”

7. It is apparent that the petitioner’s grandfather is the cousin brother of the deceased and as per the Schedule, Sr. No.7, only the father’s brother and father’s sister have been stipulated as heirs. Therefore, the property devolves to the mother’s side.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner fails to demonstrate that the petitioner covers under any of the category.

9. Hence, this Revision fails and is hereby dismissed. The impugned order is hereby confirmed.