1 2025:CGHC:11717 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CR No. 154 of 2024 1 - Harihar Prasad S/o Rambhajan Aged About 61 Years R/o Village- Kachkoba, Tahsil- Tamnar, District- Raigarh ( C.G.). 2 - Smt. Vdhyamati W/o Harihar Prasad Aged About 56 Years R/o Village- Kachkoba, Tahsil- Tamnar, District- Raigarh ( C.G.). ... Applicants versus 1 - Smt. Sulochna W/o Aashish, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Balakpodi, Mohalla, Sigraeel Podi, Tahsil- Dharamjaigarh, District- Raigarh ( C.G.). 2 - Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation Of India, First- Floor, Sunaliya Building Sattiguri Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District- Raigarh ( C.G.). 3 - General Public ... Respondents For Applicants : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Devendra Patel, Advocate PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.03.11 10:53:29 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 10/03/2025 1. This Revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 29.06.2024 passed by the 3rd District Judge, Raigarh in Civil Appeal No.10/2024 whereby while dismissing the Appeal, the order passed by the Succession Court i.e. 1st Civil Judge, Class- I, Raigarh in Succession Case No.24/2022 whereby the succession certificate has been issued in respect of half of the share of the claim amount of the bearing Policy No.368413156 of Rs.2,50,000/- in favour of respondent No.1 (wife of the deceased Late Lukeshwar Prasad) herein, was affirmed. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that after the death of Lukeshwar Prasad, respondent No.1 has remarried Ashish, so she is not entitled to the property of her ex-husband, therefore, both the Courts below have wrongly issued the succession certificate in favour of the wife. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that there is no such law whereby the remarriage of a widow would disqualify her interest in the property of her ex-husband. He would further submit that in view of Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, the wife belongs to the category of Class I heir along with the mother of the deceased, so the succession Court and the Appellate Court have rightly distributed the claim amount in equal shares to the mother and wife, and there is no such infirmity or illegality in the said order warranting any interference, therefore, this Revision may be dismissed. 3 4. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and in view of the Schedule of Section 8, the wife is a Class I heir along with the mother of the deceased, so both the Courts below have rightly applied the legal principles and issued the succession certificate in an equal manner for the wife and the mother, therefore, this Court does not find any merit or substance in this Revision. 5. Resultantly, the Revision fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Priyanka