Pradeep Kumar, J.-Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the Respondent.

2. The instant appeal has been filed by Ram Jatan Murmu S/o Babu Ram Murmu, who had earlier filed an application before the trial court u/s 372 of the Indian Succession Act through his grandfather Dhona Murmu for grant of succession certificate which was refused and by the impugned order dated 16th September, 1998, learned District Judge, Sri Harishankar Prasad, Dumka (S.P.) granted succession certificate to the mother, Marshila Marandi-Respondent No. 1 in the case. After filing of the appeal and during the pendency of the same, the appellant-minor, Ram Jatan Murmu has become major and has prayed to contest the appeal as major, as allowed by order dated 15.4.2010.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since, appellant is major, as per the Santhal Law under their customary law accepted by Hon'ble Supreme Court and also by this Hon'ble Court in various judgments, he alone being the male heir of his father, Baburam Murmu is entitled to succeed to the properties of his father including the insurance policy, provident fund and money etc. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the trial court had granted certificate in favour of the mother holding that she is the natural guardian of the minor son, Ram Jatan Murmu. Since, his grandfather has wrongfully kept him and filed succession certificate, the succession certificate was granted in favour of the mother as natural guardian, but now the situation has changed and the son himself is in a position to look after the properties of his father and also his mother.

Learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in "1996 SCC page 1864 [ : 1996(2) PLJR (SC)133] in the case of Madhu Kishwar vs. State of Bihar", wherein it was held that a tribal woman cannot succeed as absolute owner of the property of her husband and as such the impugned judgment is fit to be set aside and the appeal may be allowed.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the widow-mother-respondent, Marshila Marandi, after the death of her husband was ousted from the house of her husband and her son, Ram Jatan Murmu was taken in possession by the grandfather Dhona Murmu and as such the respondent-widow, who had got no source of her maintenance has rightly been granted succession certificate with regard to the provident fund, gratuity, insurance policy etc. of her husband because she has got no other source of income. All the lands and property are under the control of the appellant-son-Ram Jatan Murmu and his grandfather, Dhona Murmu and as such the impugned order should not be disturbed. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that even the learned District Judge in the impugned order has relied upon the decision of "Madhu Kishwar reported in 1996 see page 1864" and the said judgment is not against the respondents and hence it requires no interference.

5. After hearing both the parties and after going through the evidences on record, I find that the learned trial court, while deciding the rival claims of the parties i.e. claim of succession certificate by the respondent-minor son through his grandfather Dhona Murmu and claim of the mother, Marshila Marandi found that Marshila Marandi being the natural guardian and mother of the minor is entitled to get the succession certificate. Learned District Judge relied upon the case of "Madhu "Kishwar reported in All Patna Law Journal (Vol. 2) page 119 which is equivalent to the case reported in 1996 see page 1864 being relied by learned counsel for the appellant". Learned counsel for the appellant has rightly submitted that the learned District Judge while passing the judgment in favour of the mother has relied on the minority view given by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Ramaswami wherein the learned Judge in para 41 of his judgment gave the finding and hold t