SURESHI DEVI Vs. RAJANDRI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First Appeal, under Section 96 of the C.P.C., has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 4.4.2005, passed by the District Judge, Uttarkashi, in O.S. No. 32 of 2000, Smt. Rajendri Devi v. Basic Siksha Parishad and Ors.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, giving rise to this appeal, are that the plaintiff/respondent No. 1, Smt. Rajendri Devi filed a declaratory suit against the defendant/appellant. State of U.P., Basic Siksha Parishad, Uttarkashi and Anil Kumar were also made defendants in the suit. According to plaintiff she was married with late Lakshmi Prasad Semwal according to Hindu rites in the year 1957. For some years the married couple lived a happy life, but in the year 1968 her husband started treating her with cruelty and ultimately he turned her out of the house and since then she is residing in her parents house, in village Sald, Patti Badahat, Tehsil Bhatwari, District Uttarkashi. According to her the marriage was not dissolved by any divorce and she is the only married wife of late Lakshmi Prasad Semwal. Late Lakshmi Prasad Semwal after turning the plaintiff out of his house, developed illicit relations with Smt. Jamunotri Devi and from her Anil Kumar and Munni Devi were born. After some time Smt. Jamunotri Devi has died and on her death late Lakshmi Prasad developed illicit relations with another lady, i.e. Smt. Lakshmi Devi and kept her his concubine but she also died. In the year 1989 late Lakshmi Prasad also developed illicit relations with defendant Smt. Sureshi Devi and kept her with him as his concubine. The assertion of the plaintiff is that late Lakshmi Prasad has not performed marriage with any of the aforesaid ladies, except the plaintiff. Lakshmi Prasad Semwal also died on 16-1-2000, leaving behind him, the plaintiff as his widow and Anil Kumar as his son. According to the plaintiff, Anil Kumar was taken in government job on the death of Lakshmi Prasad under the Dying in Harness Rules. The further allegation of the plaintiff is that she is entitled to receive the family pension, gratuity, group insurance benefit and G.P.F. amount on the death of Lakshmi Prasad from Education Department where he was working as a Principal in some College, but the Department did not pay the aforesaid amounts inspite of the repeated requests made by the plaintiff and asked her to file succession certificate. Hence the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration to the effect that she is only legally wedded wife of late Lakshi Prasad Semwal.

(3.) The defendants Basic Siksha Adhikari and State of U.P. filed written statement and admitted this fact that late Lakshmi Prasad was working on the post of Principal in Bonga. It was also admitted that defendant No. 4 Anil Kumar was given appointment under dying in harness rules. They also alleged that S.D.M. Bhatwari has issued certificate dated 1.4.2000 showing Anil Kumar, Smt. Rajendri Devi and Sureshi Devi, as near relations and heirs of late Lakshmi Prasad Semwal. It was also alleged that both the plaintiff Smt. Rajendri Devi and defendant Smt. Sureshi Devi have been filing applications claiming the payments payable to the late Lakshmi Prasad, therefore, the Basic Siksha Parishad asked them to furnish succession certificate.