A marriage solemnized while a prior marriage is still subsisting is void ab initio under personal law. Consequently, a second spouse has no claim to a succession certificate, although children born of such a union are entitled to inherit as legitimate heirs under statutory protections.

JUDGMENT :

MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.

1. Heard Mr. P. Deka, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R. K. Jain, the learned counsel for the respondents. By this common judgment, it is proposed to dispose of two appeals, namely Intest. Case No. 07 of 2016, as well as Intest. Case No.02 of 2017, as both appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 12.08.2014 passed by the learned District Judge, Dhubri, by which two succession cases, namely Misc(S/C) Case No. 10/2011, as well as Misc(S/C) Case No.21/2011, were disposed of.

2. The facts relevant for consideration of both the appeals (Intest. Case No. 07 of 2016, as well as Intest. Case No. 02/2017), in brief, are that the respondent No. 1 in both the appeals, namely, Smt. Mamoni Paul, had filed a Misc(S/C) Case, u/s 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, which was registered as Misc(S/C) Case No.10/2011, praying for grant of Succession Certificate in respect of debts and securities of her deceased husband, late Himangshu Shekhar Paul.

3. It is the case of the respondent No. 1, namely, Smt. Mamoni Paul, that she was married to late Himangshu Shekhar Paul on 24.02.1999, as per Hindu custom and rituals. Out of their wedlock, two daughters, namely, Ms. Swatabdi Paul and Ms. Chayanika Paul were born. Late Himangshu Shekhar Paul was a Sub-Inspector of Police, working in the District of Barpeta, at the time of his death. He committed suicide on 01.01.2011. At the time of his death, late Himangshu Shekhar Paul left behind his mother, an unmarried sister, three daughters and two wives.

4. After filing of the application seeking Succession Certificate by Smt. Mamoni Paul, the second wife of late Himangshu Shekhar Paul namely Smt. Jonali Paul also filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 in respect of the debts and securities of late Himangshu Shekhar Paul. It was claimed by Smt. Jonali Paul (present appellant) that she was married to late Himangshu Shekhar Paul, as per Hindu rituals, on 11.02.2005, and out of the said wedlock, one daughter, namely, Ms. Swastika Paul was also born.

5. Since both the Misc. Cases, i.e. Misc(S/C) Case No.10/2011 and Misc.(S/C) Case No.21/2011 were in respect of the debts and securities of late Himangshu Shekhar Paul, the learned District Judge, Dhubri heard both the cases together and disposed of both the cases by the common judgment dated 12^th August 2014, which has been impugned in both the abovementioned appeals. During hearing of both the Misc(S/C) cases, the petitioner of Misc(S/C) Case No.10/2011, namely Smt. Mamoni Paul, adduced her evidence as PW-1. She has also adduced the evidence of 3(three) more witnesses, namely, Smt. Anima Rani Paul, Smt. Archana Paul and Sri Jayant Kumar Dey.

6. On the other hand, the petitioner of Misc(S/C) Case No. 21/2011, namely Smt. Jonali Paul, who is the appellant of both the above-mentioned appeals herein, had adduced her own evidence as PW-1. She also adduced evidence of 4(four) more witnesses, namely Sri Surjya Kanta Roy, Sri Swapan Roy, Sri Prafulla Pathak and Sri Nirmal Roy. The Court of the learned District Judge,Dhubri, after considering the pleadings of the parties, framed the following points for determina