PALLAVI SETHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS miscellaneous appeal has been filed as against an interlocutory order dated 17.8.2006 passed in Civil Suit No. 107-A/2006 by 9th Additional District Judge, Bhopal. The Court below as per impugned order has ordered that the payment of pension to the extent of 50% be not made to the widow of the deceased. The Court below has passed the aforesaid order on the ground that pension is property and mother has the right in the property of the deceased.

(2.) SUIT has been filed by the mother claiming relief of declaration, arrears of pension and for injunction. It has been submitted by the plaintiff that succession was allowed.50% amount was ordered to be paid to the mother out of provident fund, leave encashment, gratuity, insurance cover, maturity benefit and AWWA grant. Plaintiff has come to know that pension is being paid to the widow of Rs. 12,000/- same has not been paid to the plaintiff though she is entitled to the 50% of the pension. Claim has been resisted by the defendants on the ground that succession of pension has not been pleaded in the succession case, hence plaintiff's suit is not maintainable no such interim relief can be given not to make the payment of pension to the widow.

(3.) THE widow comes in the first category to receive the pension. Prima facie plaintiff is not entitled to receive pension. In view of the aforesaid the widow cannot be deprived of the pension during pendency of this suit. No irreparable injury is going to be caused to the plaintiff in case injunction is not granted as widow is in receipt of pension, there is no justification to stop the pension treating it as a property. Pension is not being paid to the mother by Union of India, it is being paid to the widow. There is no justification to stop the pension or part of the pension being paid to the widow of the deceased. It is submitted by the respondent's counsel that widow of the deceased has remarried, though this fact is disputed by Shri Pradeep Sharma that remarriage has been performed. Whatever that may be, no provision has been shown by the respondent's counsel that remarriage divests the widow right to receive the pension under Army Regulation hence submission cannot be accepted.