1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 257 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5476 OF 2010 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : P.R. BORKAR.J. DATED : 28.04.2010 Heard Mr. J.R. Jadhavar, Advocate for the appellant and Mr. P.S. Shinde, Advocate for respondent No.1 Caveator. 2. The second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the District Judge-6, Aurangabad in R.C.A. No. 330/2008 decided on 05-02-2010 whereby the judgment and decree passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad in Special Civil Suit No. 306/2006 decided on 19-11-2008 dismissing the suit, was set aside. The first appellate Court declared that the appellant - plaintiff Vansabai is entitled to half share in the amount left by deceased Subhash 2 Shirsath as described in Para Nos. 3 and 4 of the plaint and she is entitled to receive amount to the extent of her share from the Police Department and Banks and the present appellant Kusum w/o Subhash Shirsath is also restrained from withdrawing amounts of the share of Vansabai w/o Rangnath Shirsath, as per succession certificate issued in MARJI No. 459/2006 by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad dated 19-09-2006. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as below : It is no more disputed that Subhash Rangnath Shirsath was working as Head Constable in Police Department. He expired and was survived by appellant Kusum, who is his widow; Respondent No.1 Vansabai who is the mother and respondent No.2 Rangnath who is the father of deceased Subhash. The relationship is not disputed. It is also not disputed that the amount described in Para-3 and 4 of the plaint were due as estate of deceased Subhash. In respect of amount of deceased 3 Subhash Shirsath in State Bank of Hyderabad, Branch Roza Baugh, Aurangabad and the amount in Fixed Deposit Receipts, succession certificate was sought by the present appellant and the respondents jointly. Accordingly, succession certificate was issued in the name of both the appellant and respondent No.1 being widow and mother who are Class-I heirs of deceased Subhash Rangnath Shirsath. 4. Thereafter, present respondent No. 1 Vasnsabai filed suit thereby seeking declaration that she was entitled to half share and that her share should not be withdrawn by defendant No.1 Kusum, the widow who is the appellant. The trial Court dismissed the suit, but the first appellate Court held that as per Class-I heirs, both the appellant and respondent No.1 who are respectively widow and mother, are entitled to half share in the debts and securities left behind by deceased Subhash. It is made clear that both the appellant and respondent No.1 are entitled to half share each in the amounts left by the deceased Subhash 4 and in the retiral benefits. 5. After hearing both the sides, considering facts and circumstances and admitted position, in my opinion, no substantial question of law arises in the second appeal. The order passed is legal and proper. In fact situation, the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. 6. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, Civil Application No.5476 of 2010 does not survive and hence, is disposed of as such. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] sut/APR10/sa257.10