SATHYABHAMA AMMA Vs. B. RUGMINI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 179/05 on the files of the Family Court, Nedumangad. The appellant is not a party to the suit. She claims that she is the legally wedded wife of the first defendant in the above original suit and hence she is the legal representative who is entitled to challenge the judgment and decree passed against the deceased first defendant. The original suit was one for a declaration that the plaintiff is the legally wedded wife of the first defendant and also for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the second defendant from sanctioning family pension in respect of the first defendant to anybody else except the plaintiff. The first defendant resisted the above suit contending that the plaintiff is not the legally wedded wife of him and thereby she is not entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for in the original suit. After considering the evidence on record the court below decreed the suit as prayed for. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant, who claims that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased first defendant, filed this appeal challenging the findings of the court below, on various grounds.

(2.) THE plaintiff's case, necessary for the disposal of this appeal, can be encapsulated as follows:

(3.) THE plaintiff was examined as P.W.1 and another independent witness was examined for him as P.W.2. Exts. A1 to A8 were also marked on his side. The first defendant was examined as C.P.W.1 and the brother of Sathyabhama was examined as C.P.W.2. Exts. B1 to B4 were marked on the side of the first defendant. After considering the pleadings, the court below rightly framed three issues and both parties let in evidence on the issues. Going by the issues framed by the court below, we are of the opinion that the court below has rightly framed the issues in view of the pleadings set up by both parties.