- (1.) This miscellaneous appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter, 'the 1925 Act') has been filed against the order dated 7-2-2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, Khetri, on an application under Section 372 of the 1925 Act filed by the plaintiff respondent No. 1 Bakhtawari Devi (hereinafter 'the plaintiff'). Thereby the learned Judge bifurcated the family pension payable on the death of constable Jagroop Singh working with Border Security Force between non-applicant his widow Savita Devi and the applicant mother Bakhtawari Devi. The facts of the case are that the mother of late constable Jagroop Singh working with 86 Bn. Border Security Force filed an application under Section 372 of the 1925 Act impleading as non-applicants Savita Devi widow of constable Jagroop Singh as also authorities of the Border Security Force. It was stated that the applicant Bakhtawari, the mother of constable Jagroop Singh working with Border Security Force was entitled to half of the normal family pension in view of the fact that constable Jagroop Singh's widow Savita Devi had since re-married. The application was opposed both by the non applicants widow Savita Devi as also the Border Security Force- now the appellant. It was stated that as per Rule 4(2) of the Central Civil Services (Liberalized Pensionary Award) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter 'the CCS (LPA) Rules, 1972') Savita Devi the widow of late constable Jagroop Singh alone was-entitled to normal family pension even after her re-marriage and had been availing the said pension for the last over nine years.
(2.) On the matter coming up before the court below, the issue struck was as to whether the applicant Bakhtawari Devi as the mother of deceased constable Jagroop Singh was entitled to half of the normal family pension. The court below even while noticing the CCS (LPA) Rules, 1972 whereunder only the widow of late employee of Border Security Force was entitled to normal family pension, even after re-marriage, oddly adverted to the Family Pension Rules (Defence), to hold that the applicant Bakhtawari Devi was entitled to 50% of the normal family, pension with the remainder 50% of the normal family pension going to the widow's account after her remarriage.
(3.) Hence this appeal.;