LAKSHMI HANSDA Vs. DUMNI HANSDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. L.C. Bihani, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner/plaintiff. It is submitted by him that order impugned passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bolpur, vide its order dated 24.2.2011 is not sustainable since the learned Appellate Court has failed to take into consideration the interest of the plaintiff, who is entitled to get the entire sum assured in respect of two L.I.C. Policies being policy number 461478102 and 461478765 as the sole legal heir of her husband since deceased. According to him, the interest of the sole legal heir would be seriously jeopardised if the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are not injuncted from disbursing the amount to the so called first wife-cum-nominee of the deceased. More so, whenever nomination made by the deceased only indicates the hand which is to receive benefits but benefits have to be distributed according to law of succession. In this context, he has referred to a ruling of the Apex Court Shipra Sengupta vs. Mridul Sengupta & Ors., 2009 10 SCC 680Shipra Sengupta vs. Mridul Sengupta, 1984 1 SCC 424. He has also referred to another ruling of the Apex Court , Sarbati Devi & Anr.....appellants vs. Usha Devi. wherein it is clearly held that nominee's interest in the amount received under a policy, when assured dying intestate, is subject to the claim of heirs of the assured under law of succession.

(2.) I have carefully taken into consideration the submission of Mr. Bihani, the learned Senior Counsel, with reference to the averments made in the instant revisional application coupled with the afore-cited two rulings of the Apex Court.

(3.) The relevant facts leading to filing of this revisional application may be capsulised as under :