1 C.R.A.247.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.247 OF 2011 Saeeda Mainuddin Shaikh and another ...PETITIONERS VERSUS Hanifa Jahangir Sayeed and another ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.Umakant Patil,Advocate for petitioners. Mr.K.J.Suryawanshi,Advocate for respondents. ... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 12TH OCTOBER, 2011 PER COURT : 1. This Civil Revision application is directed against the Judgment and order dated 11.08.2011, passed by the Principal District Judge, Osmanabad, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2011. By the impugned judgment and order the view is taken by the Principle District Judge, Osmanabad that the appeal is not maintainable against the order of the Civil Judge Junior Division, Kallam. 2 C.R.A.247.11 2. Learned counsel appearing for the revision applicants invited my attention to the reported judgment of this Court in the case of Vitthal Ramchandra Mali and etc Vs. Smt. Laxmi Ganpati Mali and another etc. reported in AIR 2006 Bombay 298. In the said judgment this Court has taken a view that, in view of the provisions of Section 388 of the Indian Succession Act, the appeal against the order of Civil Judge Senior Division passed on application for grant of succession certificate would lie to District Judge and not to High Court. 3. Learned counsel further invited my attention to the provisions of Section 388 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and would submit that impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set aside by holding that the appeal before District Court is maintainable. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly conceded that in view of provisions of 3 C.R.A.247.11 Section 388 of the Indian Succession Act 1925, the appeal is maintainable before the District Judge. 5. I have given due consideration to the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. I have perused the contents of the Civil Revision Application, provisions of Section 388 of the Indian Succession Act and reported judgment of this Court in the case of Vitthal Ramchandra Mali and etc Vs. Smt. Laxmi Ganpati Mali and another etc. supra, I am of the considered opinion that in view of the provisions of Section 388 of the Indian Succession Act and the authoritative pronouncement in the case of Vitthal Ramchandra Mali and etc Vs. Smt. Laxmi Ganpati Mali and another etc. supra the appeal is maintainable before the District Judge, Osmanabad. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and quashed. Misc. Civil Application No. 16 of 2011 is restored to its original file. The Principal District Judge, Osmanabad to hear 4 C.R.A.247.11 the said appeal on merits and disposed of the same in accordance with law. The Civil Revision Application is allowed to above extent and same stands disposed. Sd/- [S.S. SHINDE, J.] MTK