JUDGMENT At para 4, there is a finding and that is important. In the impugned order itself the trial Court has recorded that Pannalal-appellant, gave evidence that Sonabai was married to deceased Om Prakash, but she was divorced. Evidently, she cannot be legal heir of Om prakash, as divorce took place before his death. In the instant appeal, the main ground taken is that in the presence of first wife, there can be no valid marriage of Om Prakash with the respondent, Basantibai. Thus, Basantibai could not claim to be his wife and could not get a Succession Certificate on that basis. I do not think that the ground is at all tenable for the reason, just stated, that Om Prakash was free to contract a fresh marriage after divorcing his first wife Sonabai, though she was alive; therefore, the second marriage, he validly contracted with Basantibai. That apart, Shri Mittal has filed today a copy of the order dated 4.12.85, passed by this Court in M.P. No. 147 of 1985. I was a party to that decision. A Division Bench of this Court had taken the view in that matter that Succession Certificate which had been granted to the petitioner, Pannalal, was not tenable in law and accordingly, Succession Certificate granted to him was set aside and a direction was made to the trial Court to issue a notice to Basanti Bai who claimed to be the wife of deceased Om Prakash. The instant order fully, completely and religiously complies with the direction made in the said matter. That apart, for valid reasons, the trial Court has granted Succession Certificate to Basanti Bai because Ex. D-1 is a Nomination Form and, prima facie, she had entitlement in law to claim Succession Certificate in regard to Provident Fund dues of her deceased husband Om Prakash. Basantibai examined herself and her evidence had been taken into consideration, in granting her the Succession Certificate. For all the aforesaid reasons, I find, this appeal has no merits and it is dismissed.