BISNATH PURAINA vs SMT. SON BAI PURAINA

1

CGHC010513012025 2026:CGHC:38742
NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CR No. 329 of 2025
Bisnath Puraina S/o Late T.R. Puraina Aged About 58 Years R/o Village
Chowkbeda, Police Station Tendukona, Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund
Chhattisgarh (N.A. No. 05 Before Court Below)
--- Applicant
versus
1 - Smt. Son Bai Puraina Wd/o Late Gaya Prasad Puraina Aged About 50 Years
R/o Qtr. No. 08, Block No. 15, Street No. 15/b, Sector-2, Bhilai Tahsil And District
Durg Chhattisgarh (Applicant No. 01)
2 - Ku. Rishika D/o Late Gaya Prasad Puraina Aged About 19 Years R/o Qtr. No.
08, Block No. 15, Street No. 15/b, Sector-2, Bhilai Tahsil And District Durg
Chhattisgarh (Applicant No. 02)
3 - Ku. Ishika D/o Late Gaya Prasad Puraina Aged About 15 Years Minor Through
The Natural Guardian - Mother Smt. Son Bai Puraina, Wd/o Late Gaya Prasad
Puraina R/o Qtr. No. 08, Block No. 15, Street No. 15/b, Sector-2, Bhilai Tahsil And
District Durg Chhattisgarh (Applicant No. 3)
4 - Public At Large Nil (Non-Applicant No. 01)
5 - The Registrar Pandit Ravi Shankar University, Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No. 02)
6 - Branch Manager State Bank Of India, Branch Pandit Ravishankar University
Campus, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No. 03)

2
7 - Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Civil Lines Branch, Raipur,
District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Non-Applicant No. 04)
--- Respondents

For applicant : Mr. Ankita Goswami, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Pushpendra
Kumar Patel, Adv.
For respondent no. 5 Mr. Deeksha Pandey, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Neeraj
Choubey, Adv.
For Respondent No. 6 : Ms. Vartika Shrivastava, Adv. on behalf of Mr. P.R.
Patankar, Adv.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
Order On Board
1-9-2026
1.
The applicant has preferred this civil revision under Section
384(3) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, read with Section 115
of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the order dated 31-
10-2025 passed by the 5th District Judge, Durg (C.G.), in Civil
Appeal No. 191/2024, whereby respondents No. 2 and 3 have
been held entitled for grant of succession certificate.
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondents No. 1 to 3 filed
Succession Case No. 35/2021 before the Additional 1st Civil
st
Judge, Senior Division, Durg to the Court of 1 Civil Judge, Sr.
Division, Durg for grant of a succession certificate in their favour
on account of the death of their husband/father, late Ganga
Prasad Puraina. The said case was partly allowed vide order
dated 9-5-2024. Against the aforesaid order dated 9-5-2024,
respondents No. 1 to 3 preferred an appeal bearing Civil Appeal
No. 191/2024, which was allowed vide order dated 31-10-2025.

3
Against the said order, the instant revision has been preferred by
the applicant.
3. The issue involved in the instant revision is with regard to the
entitlement to obtain a succession certificate in respect of the
assets of late Ganga Prasad Puraina. Vide the impugned order
dated 31-10-2025, the learned 5th District Judge, Durg, in Civil
Appeal No. 191/2024, has held respondents No. 2 and 3, being
the daughters of late Ganga Prasad Puraina, entitled to obtain the
succession certificate.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the
applicant, Bisnath Puraina, is the brother of late Ganga Prasad
Puraina. Since his mother, Kholbahrin Puraina, who was also the
mother of late Ganga Prasad Puraina, had died, the applicant is
also entitled to a share in the subject amount belonging to late
Ganga Prasad Puraina. He, therefore, submits that the instant
revision may be admitted for hearing.
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 5 and 6 submits
that they are merely formal parties in the case.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
7.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant that, since his
mother, Kholbahrin Puraina, who was also the mother of late
Ganga Prasad Puraina, had died, the applicant is also entitled to

4
a share in the subject amount belonging to late Ganga Prasad
Puraina, is not sustainable. The applicant, Bisnath Puraina, being
the brother of late Ganga Prasad Puraina is not his successor of
Category 1. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to admit instant misc.
appeal. Hence the same is rejected at motion stage.
8. Hence, the instant revision is rejected at the motion stage.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
pathak
AVANISH
KUMAR
PATHAK
Digitally signed
by AVANISH
KUMAR PATHAK
Date: 2026.09.03
13:03:06 +0530