A.K. Shrivastava, J.

1. The order passed in this revision shall also govern the disposal of connected Civil Revision No. 470/2006 since both the revisions have arisen from a common order in two appeals passed by the learned District Judge, Chhindwara.

2. One Chandra Bai stating herself to be the wife of Mehtab Singh Gond filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (in short, 'the Act of 1925') which was registered as Case No. 55/2003 at Chhindwara praying that she had been married to Mehtab Singh Gond and out of their wedlock, two daughters were born, they are Applicants 2 and 3 in the application filed before the learned trial Court. The Succession application was filed against Smt. Sarita Bai in which Superintendent of Police Rajanandgaon was also arrayed as non-Applicant No. 2. In the Succession application it has been pleaded that Sarita Bai is the wife of one Raghuveer Prasad and she is not entitled to receive GPF, CIS and gratuity amount of her late husband Mehtab Singh Gond who breathed his last on 24-5-2003 while serving as a Constable No. 74 in the Police Department of the State of M.P.

3. After having served with the notice, the present Applicant Sarita Bai filed a separate application which was registered as Case No. 12/2004 in the same Court for obtaining succession certificate claiming herself to be legally wedded wife of Mehtab Singh Gond. Inter alia it has been pleaded that her marriage was solemnized with Mehtab Singh Gond in the year 1984. In the service record, her name has been mentioned as a nominee of her late husband. Since Mehtab Singh Gond had died, therefore, it has been prayed by her that the amount of GPF, GIS and gratuity be paid to her. The learned trial Court rejected the application of Sarita Bai but partly allowed the application of Chandra Bai granting succession certificate to her two children born from the company of Mehtab Singh Gond.

4. The order of learned trial Court was assailed by Sarita Bai by preferring two different appeals which were registered as Misc. Civil Appeal Nos. 05/06 and 06/06. One appeal was filed against the dismissal of her application under Section 372 of the Act of 1925 and another appeal was preferred assailing the order of the learned trial Court by which the application of Chandra Bai was allowed in part granting succession certificate in favour of her two children born from the company of Mehtab Singh Gond. The learned First Appellate Court by the impugned order dated 31-10-2006 dismissed both the appeals.

5. In this manner, these two civil revisions have been filed by Sarita Bai.

6. The contention of learned Counsel for the Applicant is that since Mehtab Singh Gond solemnized second marriage with Chandra Bai when the valid marriage of Sarita Bai was subsisting without obtaining any divorce from her, the children born from the company of Mehtab Singh Gond cannot be said to be legitimate children of Mehtab Singh Gond and learned two Courts below erred in granting succession certificate to them. In support of his contention, learned Counsel has placed reliance on a decision of this Court in Ramkali and Anr. v. Mahila Shyamwati and Ors. 2000 (3) M.P.L.J. 361.

7. On the other hand, Shri Pradeep Naveriya, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents argued in support of the impugned orders. Learned Counsel has placed heavy reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Gurnam Kaur (Smt.) and Anr. v. Puran Singh and Ors. (1996) 2 SCC 567 and in case of Smt. Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma and Ors. v. K. Devi and Ors. AIR 1996 SC 1963.

8. Having heard learned Counsel for die parties, I am of the view that both these revisions deserve to be allowed in part.

9. On bare perusal of the findings of the learned two Courts below, it is gathered that Applicant Sarita Bai got married with Mehtab Singh Gond in the year 1984. Without obtaining any decree of divorce during the subsistence of his first marriage with Sarita Bai, Mehtab Sin