VILASINI Vs. PRASANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent in O.P. No. 116/2013 has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment dated 28/10/2013 of the Family Court, Attingal. By the impugned judgment, the Family Court granted a decree declaring that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of late Sundaresan, who retired from Krishi Bhavan and died on

(2.) /3/2007. 2. Petitioner contended that she was the legally wedded wife of Sundaresan. According to her, they got married as per religious rites and ceremonies prevailing among the community on 24/2/1974. The marriage took place at her house and they were living as husband-and-wife. A male child was born in the wedlock. Sundaresan got appointment as Agricultural Demonstrator at Malappuram. He shifted the residence to Malappuram and developed an illicit intimacy with the respondent. Thereafter, he neglected the petitioner and her child. She filed MC No. 25/1990 before the Judicial Magistrate of 1 st Class, Attingal. Maintenance was ordered and the money was being paid by her husband regularly. She also contended that during the last phase of her husband's life, he resumed the relationship with the petitioner. After the death of her husband, she approached the Department for family pension benefits. She was directed to produce a declaration from a competent court, since the respondent was shown as the nominee and legally wedded wife of the deceased in the service book.

(3.) The respondent in the objection denied the existence of a legal marriage between the petitioner and late Sundaresan. She contended that she married Sundaresan on 21/10/1978, as per the custom and ceremonies of the community in a temple. According to her, while he was employed at Malappuram, they were living together. She denied having any knowledge about a previous marriage with the petitioner.