Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.42 seconds)

Raj Kumari & Anr vs Krishna & Ors on 26 February, 2015

In 2015 (14) SCC 511 [ Raj Kumari and another Vs. Krishna and Others], the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that family pension is sanctioned to a legal wedded wife of the deceased Government employee. In the said case, the deceased Government employee had married the plaintiff therein while the first wife alive. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the plaintiff can, by any stretch of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 19 imagination be described as a legally wedded wife of the deceased Government employee. That ratio squarely applies to the case of this case. The petitioner never claim the status of a legally wedded wife. Therefore, she cannot claim to be a widow. She cannot claim pension.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 16 - A R Dave - Full Document

P.Visalakshiamma vs The Director Of Schools Higher ... on 4 April, 2014

(vi) 2014-2 L.W. 1009 [ P.Visalakshiamma Vs. The Director of Schools Higher Education and others]. The issue in that case was with respect to nomination of the second wife of the Government servant and it was held that a nominee is a person, who is to immediately be put in charge of the benefits and is bound to distribute the same between the legal heirs. It was very specifically stated that since the marriage was not valid in the eye of law, she cannot be termed as a widow as per Rule 49(7) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978. A compromise had been entered into and that was recorded. However, it was very specifically held that under Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, a Hindu male or a female cannot marry again during the subsistence of the first marriage. Such marriage will be void abinitio. The observation in this Judgment actually works against the appellants herein.
Madras High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 4 - R Mahadevan - Full Document

Tmt.J.Rajakumari vs The Superintendent Of Police on 31 March, 2016

(xii) 2016 SCC OnLine Mad 15221 [ Tmt. J.Rajakumari Vs. The Superintendent of Police]. In the entire Judgment, the learned counsels, who argued had not brought to the notice of the Court Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 which very specifically prohibits second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage. The Rules under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules can never override substantial law as stated under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 relating to validity and legality of a second marriage. The said Judgment is not applicable to the facts of this case.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 3 - T Raja - Full Document

Smt. Tulsa Devi Nirola And Others vs Smt. Radha Nirola And Others on 29 May, 2017

(xiv) CDJ 2020 SC 314 [ Tulsa Devi Nirola and Others Vs. Radha Nirola and Others]. The Hob’ble Supreme Court was concerned with grant of Succession Certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act 1925. The deceased had contracted a second marriage on 09.05.1987. It was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 had not been brought into force by that date in the State of Sikkim.
Sikkim High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - M M Rai - Full Document
1   2 Next