THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A. No.2080 of 2001 ORDER: Respondent No.1 is the son and respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the daughters of late Chelikani Dharma Rao. Respondent No.1 filed O.P.No.43 of 1998 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of succession certificate in respect of certain amounts left by his father Dharma Rao, who died on 14.05.1997. The appellant is the daughter of respondent No.3. She too was included as a party, in view of the fact that she was added as a party in certain proceedings as between the same parties. Respondent No.1 pleaded that he had half share in the estate held by the joint family and on the death of his father, he is entitled to 1/3rd share of the share of his father. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 did not seriously oppose this aspect. Through its order, dated 09.04.2001, the trial Court issued a succession certificate in favour of respondent No.1 directing that he shall be entitled to 4/6th share of the amounts left by late Dharma Rao. Obviously, respondent Nos.2 and 3 were held to be entitled to 1/3rd each from out of the half share of the deceased. The appellant pleaded that she alone was nominated by late Dharma Rao and thereby, she is entitled to receive the entire amount to the exclusion of the respondents. This contention was repelled by the trial Court. Heard Sri V.Jithender Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri V.L.N.G.K.Murthy, learned counsel for respondent No.1. The appellant is not a class-I heir of late Dharma Rao. The respondents being the son and two daughters are the class-I heirs and accordingly, they were held to be entitled to receive their respective shares. The only basis pleaded by the appellant is that the deceased nominated her as the one to receive the various amounts. The matter is no longer res integra. In several matters, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a nominee would have the right to receive any benefit extendible to the deceased only for the limited purpose of passing it over to the respective legal heirs. Reference in this context may be made to the judgment reported in Shri Vishin N. Khanchandani Vs. Vidya Lachmandas Khanchandani[1]. Once it emerges that the appellant did not have any right except as nominee, naturally the legal heirs of the deceased cannot be denied their respective shares. The judgment of the trial Court does not suffer from any legal or factual infirmities. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:15.10.2009. kdl [1] 2006 SCC 724