STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. SAVITRI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Lal Singh, son of the respondent who died in harness, had worked as constable in Gujarat State Reserve Police in the year 1975. He was recruited in the year 1965 as a constable. After his demise, his widow Savitri was granted family pension. She contracted second marriage in 1976. Consequently, the appellant stopped paying pension to the widow. In 1987, the respondent laid the suit in the Court of Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Mohindergarh, Haryana State claiming family pension. The trial Count decreed the suit. On appeal, the District Court refused to condone the delay of 107 days and confirmed the decree of the trial Court and when second appeal was preferred, the High Court in RSA No. 1660 / 94 by an order dated 17th December, 1994 dismissed it, as usual, in limine. Thus this appeal by special leave.

(3.) Two questions have been raised in this appeal. First relates to the jurisdiction and the second to the entitlement of the respondent to pension. It is an admitted fact that the deceased Lal Singh served as a constable in, the State of Gujarat. Section 20, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 envisages institution of the suit in the Court within whose jurisdiction the defendants ordinarily reside etc. The appellant's offices are situated in Gujarat State and no part of the cause of action had arisen in Haryana. Neither counsel can waive the jurisdiction nor consent confer jurisdiction on Courts situated in the State of Haryana. Therefore, none of the courts in Haryana has any territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit for the payment of pension by the Sate of Gujarat. Under these circumstances, the decree of the trial Court is one of total lack of jurisdiction. It is a nullity.