SHABIRABI Vs. SHARAPUNABI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned writ petitions are filed by the petitioners challenging the orders passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Hadagali on I.A.Nos.11, 12, 13 and 14 in E.X.No.11/2010

(2.) Brief facts leading to this top noted writ petitions are as under: Respondent No.1 along with her children filed a suit in O.S.No.28/2000 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Hadagali seeking the relief of declaration that she being the second wife alone is entitled to receive the benefits of deceased Khaja Modinsab who died on 16.07.1999. The present petitioners on receipt of summons contested the proceedings by filing written statement. The Trial Court decreed the suit. The present petitioners being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.28/2000 preferred an appeal in R.A.No.1/2004. The appellate Court dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. Being aggrieved by the concurrent findings, the petitioners herein preferred regular second appeal before this Court in RSA No.2333/2005. The petitioners have placed on record the judgment passed by this Court in RSA No.2333/2005 as per Annexure-B. This Court was pleased to admit the appeal and thereafter proceeded to hear the matter and accordingly, allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below and consequently dismissed the suit of the respondents in O.S.No.28/2000. This Court while allowing the appeal recorded a categorical finding that respondent Nos.1 to 3 cannot claim pensionary benefits. Accordingly, the second appeal was allowed. However, this Court was of the view that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are entitled for service benefits. However, the said grievance needs to be adjudicated under personal law governed by the personal law of the parties.

(3.) It appears respondent Nos.1 to 3 have filed execution petition by relying on the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.28/2000. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 were also able to withdraw half of the pensionary amount by relying on the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.28/2000. In this background, it appears respondents filed an application in I.A.No.11 seeking attachment of salary of petitioner No.2 before this Court. I.A.No.13 was filed by the respondents to recall the orders dated 06.06.2015 and 27.02.2016 wherein the executing Court had rejected the claim of respondent Nos.1 to 3 seeking withdrawal of half of the pension amount. I.A.No.14 was filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 alleging disobedience by the manager of the bank who was not party to the execution petition.