(1) SA. 598.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 598 OF 2009 Manjulabai w/o Madhav Kotkar .. Appellant VERSUS Shobhabai Arjun Kotkar and ors. .. Respondents Mr. K.M. Nagarkar, Advocate for the appellant CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 25TH AUGUST, 2009 ORAL ORDER:- 1] Heard. Office objection regarding addition of Madhav Kotkar, as party respondent is over-ruled. This second appeal arose from two Civil Misc. Applications filed for getting succession certificate. The present appellant Manjulabai was mother of one Arjun, whereas the respondent no.1 Shobhabai was wife and respondent nos. 2 and 3 were children of Arjun. Sometime prior to 1988, Arjun who was employed with MSEB died. The respondent no.1 Shobhabai was accused of committing murder of Arjun and on account of such background, after the death of Arjun there occurred two groups in the LRs. of Arjun. The present appellant and her husband formed one group, whereas the respondents formed the (2) SA. 598.2009 other. Both these groups moved for succession certificates. These applications remained pending since 1988 till 2006. The learned Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Ahmednagar ultimately by his judgment dated 24.2.2006 held that succession certificate should be granted in favour of the present appellant as well as the respondent no.1. Even the First Appeal filed by the appellant failed. 2] The appellant now wants determination of her objection as to whether a person who had allegedly committed murder or had abated such murder, should be qualified for inheritance of the estate of the murdered person? I am afraid such question is beyond the scope of the present litigation. The succession certificate is issued as a stop-gap arrangement. The parties are still free to seek partition on the basis of the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act. The impugned judgment of the Courts below cannot be disturbed. 3] The Second Appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp