Family Pension
1. Reason of Rejction
"उपरोक्त सम्बन्धमा तपाइलाई सुचित गरिन्छ कि तपाइले जेठी श्रीमतिको जीवनकालमा बिबाह गर्नुभएको रहेछ, बहुबिवाह हुनुको कारण तपाइको नाममा १००% पेन्सन मन्जुर हुन सक्दैन।"
"Regarding the above, you are informed that you have married during the lifetime of first wife. Because of polygamy, 100% pension cannot be sanctioned in your name."
While trying to collect some information briefly from the web:
2. THE HINDU
December 26, 2013Family pension for army man's second wife
The Armed Forces Tribunal, Madras Region, has ruled that a woman who lived with a retired army man for about 24 years was entitled to family pension. The Bench comprising members Justice V. Periya Karuppiah and Lt.Gen (Rtd) Anand Mohan Verma said, "The purpose of family pension is that the family must not suffer upon the demise of the individual."
Gottala Jannadha Rao of East Godavari retired from the Army in 1989 with pension and other retiral benefits. While in service, he married Giri Kumari in 1977, and two children were born to them. The couple got 'customary divorce' in accordance with custom prevalent in their community and in the presence of elders. Later, she married another person and settled in UAE.
After retirement, Mr. Rao married Mary Bharathi according to Christian rites and a daughter was born to them. After his death in 2010, Ms. Bharathi was not able to receive the family pension. Hence, she filed the present application before the AFT.
Her counsel said during his lifetime Mr.Rao attempted to get Ms.Bharathi's name entered in his personal records held by the Army to ensure that she got the family pension upon his demise. The records were not amended as the authorities insisted on a decree of divorce from a court of law. Hence, he executed a will bequeathing all financial benefits to her.
Counsel for Defence submitted that the second wife could not be considered as legitimate heir and she was not entitled to family pension.
The Bench said, "The Supreme Court held that if a man and woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for a number of years, there will be a presumption that they have lived as husband and wife and the children born will be legitimate."
Relying on the judgment, the Bench said all the documents establish that Mr.Rao and Ms.Bharathi lived as husband and wife since 1989 till his death and also pointed out that the will of Mr.Rao was in favour of her and her daughter.
The Bench directed the Defence authorities to grant family pension to her with effect from 2010.
Source: https://tinyurl.com/2m9sd9kh3. Pramila Devi w/o late Motichand Ram case
19 June 2013This matter was originally filed before the Hon'ble Patna High court as a writ petition (No. CWJC 11989 of 2008), which later was transferred to this Tribunal by operation of Sec. 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2OO7 and renumbered as TA 90 of 2011.
2. The factual matrix of the matter in brief is that the applicant, Smt. pramila Devi, is the second wife of a retired army personnel (late Sepoy Motichand Ram) of Bombay Engineers Group in the corps of engineers. Said Sepoy Motichand Ram was enrolled in the Army on 24.2.1961 and was discharged on 29.2.1976 on fulfilling his terms and conditions of enrolment in accordance with Army rule 13(3xlll(i). He was in receipt of his normal service pension as per ppo No. 5/6483/1976 dt. 5.4.76. Subsequento his retirement from army, he was employed in the Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) as a Security Guard. Unfortunately, he died in an accident on 20.4.1983 while on re-employment in DVC.
3. Subsequent to his death, the army authorities sanctioned family pension to his wife, Smt. Sheojhari Devi, who as per records available with the Records office is the only legally married wife, though submitted in the ibid petition as the first wife of the applicant's late husband Sepoy Motichand Ram. Smt. Sheojhari Devi had no issue from her wedlock with the applicant's husband, late sepoy Motichand Ram.
4. After retirement of the said Sepoy, he, as submitted by the applicant, married her (Smt. Pramila Devi) on 28.4.1977 after obtaining consent of the first wife Smt' Sheojhari Devi, since she could not bear any child. Therefore, late Sepoy Motichand Ram married the applicant for the second time in the life time of his first wife and such marriage was solemnized after the soldier had retired from service. The army authorities were not informed by the pensioner (Sep Motichand Ram) about this occurrence. The applicant bore two children out of her wedlock with the said late Sep oy- viz. one son Prabhakar Kum ar @ Saroj Kumar) and one daughter (Sandhya Kumari), as is evident from annexure-A2 wherein a genealogical chart has been attached by the applicant.
5. The first wife of the deceased Sepoy, who was in receipt of family pension, died on 30.5.1998. Thereafter, the present applicant, as the second wife of the deceased soldier, submitted a petition on 2.7.01 (Annexure-A4) and subsequently entered into correspondence with the army authorities with a prayer for grant of family pension as is evident from Annexures-S, 6 and 7.
6. lt is submitted by the applicant that subsequent to death of her husband, the DVC authorities allowed family pension and other such death benefits in her favour i.e. (Pramila Devi) on the basis of mutual consent between the two wives, The necessary compromise petition filed in the Court of Ld. Addl. Munsif, Bermo in TS No. 45 of 90, which is dated 23.3.1992, is at annexure-A15 of the affidavitin-reply.
7 . The case of the applicant is that since the first wife is no more, she (the applicant), though the second wife of the deceased Sepoy, is entitled to family pension which must be granted to her without any further delay. Moreover, it is submitted that she has two children born out of her wedlock with the deceased Sepoy, who were born on 7 .5.79 (boy child) and on 1 3.6.81 (girl child) respectively.
24. ln view of the above, we hold that the applicant is not entitled to family pension, as claimed, unless and until she obtains a decree from the civil court that her marriage with late Sepoy Motichand Ram was valid and she is the legally married wife/widow of said late Sepoy Motichand Ram.
Source: http://aftkolkata.nic.in/upload/court/Court-65.PDF4. Indian Army
Legal issues Related to Pensionary Benefits
2. Legal Wife and Legal Child. Instances of plural marriages are extremely less. But they exist and normally surface after retirement/death of the indl. The legal position on this matter is as follows:-
(a) As per Hindu marriage act (applicable to most other religions) the lady with whom the indl got married for the first time is the legal wife. Any marriage with another lady before the death/divorce (as given by a court of law) of first wife is void in the eyes of law. A wife from void marriage is not entitled for family pension.
(b) A marriage solemnised done before death /divorce with the legal wife will continue to remain void even after subsequent death/ divorce of first wife. The fact that the first wife had consented for such a marriage in her life time does not make it legal and the marriage will continue to be void in the eyes of law.
(c) However children born from void marriages are considered as legal children and they will be legally entitled to family pension as per their eligibility on the same lines as children from a legal marriage.
Source: https://tinyurl.com/wsjmnz5f5. Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) Prayagraj
Ordinary Family Pension
It is governed by the provision of "Family Pension Scheme-1964" which was introduced WEF. 01-01-1964 vides Army Instruction No. 2/S/64 replaced vide AI-51/80.
The benefit of this scheme has also been extended from 22-09-1977 to the families of Armed Forces Personnel of those who retired/died before 31-12-1963 vides GOI, MOD No. F 6(2)/85/1689/B/D (P/S) dt 08-08-85.
Division of Ordinary Family Pension
In this connection, the provision contained in Para 9 (a) to (c) of AI 51/80, AS amended by GOI, MOD letter no. A/06320/Div/AG/PS-4(e)/395/B/D/(P/S) dated 25-05-1992, is as under:-
where an individual is survived by more than one widow, the pension will be paid to them in equal shares. On the death of a widow her share of the pension will become payable to her eligible child. Provided that if widow leaves no eligible child, the payment of her share of the pension will not lapsed but shall be payable to the other widows in equal shares, or if there is only one such other widow, in full to her.
Para 9(a)Where an individual is survived by a widow and has also left behind an eligible child/children from another wife who is not alive, the eligible child of the deceased wife, shall be entitled to the share of pension which the mother would have received if she had been alive at the time of the death of the individual, provided that on the shares of OFP payable to such a child or widow ceasing to be payable, such shares shall not lapse but shall be payable to other widow or child otherwise eligible in equal shares, or if there is only one widow or child, in full share to such widow or child.
Last updated on : 24-11-2022
Source: https://tinyurl.com/ywd4puhk6. Grounds and Bases:
Keywords:
- Hindu Marriage Act 1955 (India)
- Nepal Marriage Bill 1950 (Nepal)
- Tripartite Agreement 1947
- Civil Court
Post a Comment
0 Comments