- (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Mahfooz Alam and the learned Counsel for the opposite parties 1 and 2 Sri P. K. Khare.
(2.) THE petitioner who claim to be the widow of Sri Prem Chandra has approached this Court claiming that the respondent 1 and 2 should allow her to withdraw the amount of two Insurance Polices Nos. 049573083 and 027896176. Further prayer has been made that the amount should not be released in favour of opposite party No. 3. It is admitted to the petitioner that deceased Sri Prem Chandra has nominated respondent No. 3 in the aforesaid Insurance Polices. The opposite party No. 3 is the mother of Sri Prem Chandra and she admittedly is nominee of two Insurance Polices, is not in dispute in the instant writ petition. The petitioner claims that she being the widow and also on the basis of some Will said to have been executed in her favour, is legal heir, and therefore, the money cannot be released in favour of the nominee whereas the same should be paid to the petitioner. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner being the legal heir in pursuance of the Will is entitled for the aforesaid amount. The question as to whether the petitioner is the legal heir or any Will has been executed in her favour or she has got any right in the money covered under the two Insurance Polices, is a matter to be decided by the Competent Court or authority. These questions of fact cannot be decided under Article 226 of Constitution in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. Besides this nominee in the Insurance Polices only facilitates the payment of the amount but by virtue of a person being appointed as a 'nominee' he or she does not get any right in the money so received. Even if the money is to be paid to the legal heir who is entitled for the amount can claim the amount and the 'nominee' cannot have a defence in absence of his/her legal right for holding the money that the same shall not be paid to the legal heir.
(3.) WE, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. It is, however, open to the petitioner to lay her claim before the authority concerned or get it adjudicated in the appropriate Forum. If such a claim is put forward before the authorities concerned, they shall deal with the same in accordance with law. Petition dismissed. .;