CHAINI DEVI Vs. GENERAL PUBLIC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant appeal, under Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC, petitioners have challenged order dated 6th of July, 2018, passed by District Judge, Sirohi (for short, 'learned Court below'). By the order impugned, learned Court below, while considering application of respondents Nos. 2 to 4 under Sec. 151 CPC allowed the same and directed the respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India not to disburse the claim of insurance flowing from the life insurance policy in the name of Late Ghanshyam Nagora.

(2.) The application aforesaid is filed by respondents Nos. 2 to 4 inter-alia alleging therein that they are wife, daughter and son of deceased Ghanshyam Nagora and as such are entitled to receive his insurance claim as Class-I legal heirs. Although before the learned Court below legitimacy of matrimony between Ghanshyam Nagora and second respondent Smt. Jyoti Nagora is seriously disputed by the appellants but the learned Court below, while refraining to make any observations about legality of marriage, granted indulgence to them by stating that validity of marriage too cannot defeat the right of children in accordance with law of inheritance. The learned Court below has observed that while it is true that decree for dissolution of marriage between Ghanshyam and respondent No. 6 is sub-judice before this Court in appeal but this fact can simply have ramification on the legality of marriage of Ghanshaym with second respondent without disturbing rights of inheritance from his estate available to the children.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.