D.S.Sinha - (1.) IN respect of the debts and securities of her husband, Sri Shiv Das Sharma, Smt. Sridevi, the appellant, applied for grant of a succession certificate under Section 372 of the INdian Succession Act, 1925, hereinafter called the Act. The claim put forth in the' application was in respect of the entire debts and securities due to the deceased husband of the appellant. The Second Civil Judge, Kanpur, after investigating the claim of the appellant, concluded that she was entitled to the grant of succession only to the extent of I /8th of her share and, therefore, by means of his order dated 8th December, 1982, directed the preparation of succession certificate in the name of the appellant to the extent of l/8th of the debts and securities payable to her deceased husband.
(2.) THE order dated 8th December, 1982, it appears, was acquiesced to by the appellant and was not appealed against. However, after lapse of a period of more than a year, i.e. on 1st March, 1983, the appellant moved an application, under section 383 of the Act read with the provisions of Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for modification of the succession certificate, already granted vide order dated 8th December, 1982, and to make the same in respect of the entire debts and securities of the deceased, Shiv Das Sharma, on the strength of certain Will dated 11th July, 1980. It appears that this application was in the nature of a review application. This application was rejected on 19th May, 1984. The order dated 19th May, 1984 too was allowed to become final inasmuch as the appellant did not challenge the order. Lateron, the appellant filed another application urging the court to set aside the order dated 19th May, 1984 whereby her review application was rejected. This application of the appellant was rejected by an order dated 9th September, 1988.
(3.) BY means of instant appeal the appellant seeks to challenge the orders dated 19th May, 1984, rejecting her first review application, and 9th September, 1988, whereby her application for recalling the order dated 19th May, 1984, has been rejected. Sri B. D. Mandhayan, learned counsel for the respondents, raises a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability Of the appeal.;