Children born out of void marriages are legitimate and entitled to succession.

I.A. Ansari, J.

1. This appeal has arisen out of the order, dated 7-9-2001, passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, West Garo Hills, Tura, Meghalaya, in Succession Case No. 56/98.

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal may, in brief, be set out as follows:-

(i) The appellant herein, namely, Sonabala Barman made an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, on 22-6-98, in the learned Court below, seeking grant of a succession certificate in respect of the debts and securities left by deceased Bimal Prasad Barman, the case of the petitioner-appellant being, in brief, thus : The petitioner married, in accordance with the Hindu rites and customs, Bimal Prasad Barman (since deceased) on 19-12-1972 and, upon marriage, they stayed together as husband and wife till the said deceased, who was, originally, a resident of village Katalbari under Phulbari Police Station, Tura, died on 27-11-1997, leaving behind, as his heirs, the petitioner and their 4 years old son, namely, Konal Barman. The said deceased also left behind 3 near relations, namely, Sushil Barman, Dhiren Barman and Smt. Ratna Sangma, (i.e., the respondent herein).

(ii) Based on the above application, Succession Case No. 5G/98 aforementioned was registered and, on receiving notice, the respondent herein, namely, Ratna Sangma, filed her objection, in writing on 28-6-98, in Succession Case No. 56/98 aforementioned, her objection being, in short, that she was married, on 25-12-1972, to the said deceased according to Christian Marriage Act and remained wedded to the said deceased till his death, the petitioner-appellant being the mistress of the said deceased and that the said deceased had left behind, besides the objector's 5 children born out of his wedlock with the objector, all the said 5 children live with the objector, there was no divorce or judicial separation between the objector and the said deceased and she (i.e., the objector), being the legally married wife of the said deceased, was the best person entitled to the grant of succession certificate in respect of the debts and securities of the said deceased described in the annexure to the petition aforementioned.

(iii) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Court below passed the order, dated 7-9-2001, aforementioned granting succession certificate in favour of the objector (i.e., the respondent herein).

3. I have heard Mr. U. S. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant, and Mr. S. R. Sen, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mrs. P.D.B. Baruah, appearing on behalf of the objector-respondent.

4. Upon perusal of the materials on record and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, what clearly transpires is that the objector-respondent's statements made in her above objection petition to the effect that the said deceased was the husband of the objector, their marriage having been solemnized, according to Christian Marriage Act, as far back as on 25-12-1972 and that out of their wedlock, the couple had 5 children, who were all living with the respondent, were not disputed by the petitioner-appellant. At the same time, the fact that while remaining wedded to the objector-respondent, the said deceased underwent a marriage with the petitioner-appellant and that out of his relationship, which the said deceased so maintained with the petitioner-appellant, the said minor child, namely, Konal Barman was born also remained undisputed.

5. In view of the fact that according to the materials on record, when the said deceased allegedly underwent marriage with the petitioner-appellant, he already stood wedded to the objector-respondent, his marriage with the objector-respondent having, admittedly, not been dissolved, the logical conclusion is that the respondent was the legally wedded wife of the said deceased, the petitioner-appellant was not legally wedded wife of the said deceased. However, the child born out of the void marriage between the