Judgment K.S.Garewal, J. 1. Review Application 23-CII of 2007 has been filed by Inderjit Kaur in the following circumstances. 2. Inderjit Kaurs husband Daljit Singh was previously married to Sarvjit Kaur on April 22, 1983 at Nabha according to the Hindu rites. They had two sons, Gurpreet Singh (born in 1984) and Gurjot Singh (born in 1985). Daljit Singh was in the Indian Navy and retired on August 31, 1991. Daljit Singh filed the petition for divorce on September 3, 1997. 3. The divorce petition filed Daljit Singh was allowed on September 5, 2000, whereupon Sarvjit Kaur filed FAO 143 - M of 2000, which was listed before Division Bench on October 3, 2000. The judgment and decree passed by the learned lower court was ordered to be stayed and it was further directed that Daljit Singh-respondent shall not re-marry. This order was passed on October 3 itself and continued its operation until FAO was decided on January 17, 2007. The appeal was allowed, consequently the divorce application filed Daljit Singh was dismissed. 4. Inderjit Kaur had got married to Daljit Singh on July 4, 2002. Unfortunately, Daljit Singh died on December 10, 2004 but from this marriage they had a daughter, born posthumously on February 18, 2005, named Gurleen Kaur. 5. The learned Senior Counsel for Inderjit Kaur has filed this review application for re-hearing the FAO because Inderjit Kaur was the heir of the deceased, was entitled to inherit his estate. She was entitled to be impleaded as a legal representative of Daljit Singh. 6. In FAO Daljit Singhs legal representative was his mother Mohinder Kaur. Daljit Singh and Inderjit Kaur had got married during the currency of the stay order dated October 3. Daljit Singh had clearly violated the order and the provision of the law which forbids parties to re-marry while an appeal is pending. 7. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the applicant had no idea that the appeal was pending although she knew that Daljit Singh had obtained divorce. 8. I do not think under any circumstances Inderjit Kaurs marriage to Daljit Singh can be considered to be a valid one. Consequently, Inderjit Kaur was not a legal representative of Daljit Singh who was required to be impleaded as such. 9. 8. I do not think under any circumstances Inderjit Kaurs marriage to Daljit Singh can be considered to be a valid one. Consequently, Inderjit Kaur was not a legal representative of Daljit Singh who was required to be impleaded as such. 9. The learned counsel has referred to Jagmohan Singh v State of Punjab and others, 2008(3) RCR(Civil) 221 : 2008(3) RAJ 584 to plead that on rare occasions subsequent events could be taken into consideration to impart justice to the parties and the judgment of this court in FAO could be reviewed. The circumstances in which Jagmohan Singhs judgment was pronounced were entirely different. In the present case, there was a clear and flagrant violation of law and of the order passed by this Court. It is unfortunate that Inderjit Kaur was misled and duped by Daljit Singh deceased but to allow her to be impleaded and review the judgment would cause injury to the first wife Sarvjit Kaur. However, rights of Gurleen Kaur born on February 18, 2005 granted under the provision of Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act shall be protected. Review application is dismissed .