JUDGMENT Usha Shukla, J. 1. This miscellaneous appeal has been filed against the order passed by First Additional District Judge, Satna rejecting under Order 7, Rule 11, C.P.C. the application of the appellants for a succession certificate Under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act. 2. In this case it is not disputed that the application for succession certificate was filed by the appellants representing themselves to be the second wife and her son from the deceased respectively. Admittedly the objectors/respondents were the first wife and her children from the deceased. The objectors raised a preliminary objection under Order 7, Rule, 11 C.P.C. on the ground that on their own showing, the petitioners were the second wife and her son from the deceased, and the second marriage during the life-time of the first wife being void under the Hindu Marriage Act, the petitioners had no interest whatsoever in the property of the deceased. This argument appealed the learned Additional District Judge, who dismissed the application for succession certificate. 3. In this appeal it has been urged that the learned Additional District Judge erred in summarily rejecting the claim without any enquiry. 4. I have heard the Counsel for both parties and have perused the record. I find that the learned Additional District Judge overlooked the provisions Under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, as amended in the year 1976, conferring over the illegitimate child, the right to property of his parents. Therefore, even if the second wife had no claim over the property of the deceased, the right of the alleged illegitimate son had yet to be decided. The Court had to arrive at a definite finding whether applicant No. 2 was the son of the deceased from his second wife, and if so whether he was entitled to the succession certificate claimed. The summary rejection of the claim was therefore not proper. 5. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The order passed by First Additional District Judge, Satna on 11.11.1992 is set aside and the case is remanded back to the Trial Court for disposal according to law in the light of the above observations. Costs to abide the result in the Trial. Court.