Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1267 (MP)

Satyawati Sharma v. Krishna Sharma

2003-11-20

A.K.AWASTHY

body2003
Judgment ( 1. ) APPELLANT/defendant has preferred this appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, against the judgment and decree dated 14-8-1987 passed by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Ratlam in Civil Appeal No. 1-A/87 confirming the judgment and decree dated 12-9-81 in Civil Suit No. 5-A/80 passed by learned Civil Judge Class-I, Ratlam. ( 2. ) THE admitted facts of the case are that Omprakash Sharma was the Government servant and he has expired while in service. It is also the common ground that appellant is the mother and the respondent Krishna Sharma is the widow of late Omprakash. ( 3. ) THE case of the respondent plaintiff is that she is entitled for the family pension while the case of the appellant is that she being the mother of the deceased is entitled for the half of the family pension. The learned Courts below have held that the appellant is not entitled for the half of the family pension and as such the claim of the appellant was dismissed. ( 4. ) THE appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :- (1) Whether the succession certificate awarded earlier to the appellant operates as res judicata in the present suit ? (2) Whether the provisions of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act can be overlooked in a suit for declaration for entitlement to get the family pension ? (3) Whether the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court are against any of the rules of the Madhya Pradesh Government pertaining to grant of family pension ? ( 5. ) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the succession certificate was granted in favour of the appellant in which it was directed that the appellant and the respondent are entitled to get the half-half share in the property left by late Omprakash and as such, the appellant is also entitled for the half share in the family pension. It is provided under Section 6 (2) of the M. P. New Family Pension Scheme, 1966, that in case of the death of the male Government servant, his wife will be entitled to get the family pension and the parents are excluded from getting the family pension. In view of the aforesaid provision of the family pension scheme, the appellant is not entitled to get the half of the amount of the family pension. In view of the aforesaid provision of the family pension scheme, the appellant is not entitled to get the half of the amount of the family pension. The order passed in succession case under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act will not be applicable in case of the entitlement of the pension to the appellant. Consequently, substantial question of law are answered accordingly, in negative. ( 6. ) THE appeal is devoid of merits and it is, hereby dismissed.