Will 2nd Spouse Get Useless Husband’s Pension? Top Courtroom Says This

Mumbai:

The Bombay Top Courtroom on Wednesday stated {that a} 2nd spouse isn’t entitled to obtain her lifeless husband’s pension in circumstances the place the second one marriage had taken position with out prison dissolution of the primary one.

A department bench of Justices S J Kathawalla and Milind Jadhav brushed aside a petition filed by way of Solapur resident Shamal Tate, difficult the state executive’s choice denying her pension advantages.

As according to the Top Courtroom order, Ms Tate’s husband Mahadeo, a peon within the place of business of the Solapur district collector, died in 1996. Mahadeo was once already married to some other lady when he married the petitioner.

After his dying, Ms Tate and Mahadeo’s first spouse got here to an settlement that the previous would obtain virtually 90 according to cent of the lifeless particular person’s retirement advantages, whilst the latter would get per month pension.

Then again, after Mahadeo’s first spouse died of most cancers, Ms Tate wrote to the state executive searching for that she be given Mahadeo’s pension dues henceforth.

After a lot deliberation, the state executive rejected the 4 packages made by way of Ms Tate between 2007 and 2014.

Ms Tate then approached the Top Courtroom in 2019 claiming that since she was once the mum of Mahadeo’s 3 kids, and the society knew them as husband and spouse, she was once eligible to obtain the pension, particularly because the first spouse, who have been receiving the pension, was once now lifeless.

The court docket, then again, held that a number of Ultimate Courtroom judgements had established {that a} 2nd marriage should be held as void beneath the Hindu Marriage Act if it’s been solemnised with out legally finishing the primary marriage.

The bench seen that the state executive have been proper in protecting that just a legally wedded spouse was once entitled to circle of relatives pension.

The court docket additionally stated that Ms Tate had now not approached it with “blank fingers”, since as according to the settlement between her and Mahadeo’s first spouse, she had explicitly relinquished her rights to the per month pension.

“The wedding of the petitioner (Tate) to the deceased is void as the similar happened whilst the primary spouse of the deceased was once alive, and whilst the primary marriage was once subsisting,” the bench stated.

“In view of the findings, this writ petition stands brushed aside,” it stated.

(Except for for the headline, this tale has now not been edited by way of TTN personnel and is revealed from a syndicated feed.)