IMPORTANT POINT
Law infers presumption in favour of a marriage when a man and woman have continuously cohabitated for a long spell.

JUDGMENT :

HIMA KOHLI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 25th June, 2013, passed by the High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad whereby the Regular Second Appeal¹ [Regular Second Appeal No. 6079 of 2010 (DEC)] filed by them against the judgment and decree dated 16th September, 2010, passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Belgaum² [Regular Appeal No. 70 of 2008], has been dismissed. Vide judgment dated 16th September, 2010, the learned Principal District Judge reversed the judgment and decree dated 22nd December, 2007, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Chikodi³ [In Original Suit No. 73/05] whereunder the suit instituted by the appellants for seeking a declaration to the effect that the appellant no. 1 was the legally wedded wife of Late Subedar Pundalik Bhave⁴ [for short “Late Subedar Bhave”] and the appellants no. 2 and 3 are their legitimate children, was decreed in their favour and it was held that they were entitled to the pensionary benefits payable by the respondents herein and standing in the name of the deceased Subedar Bhave.

3. Facts necessary for the elucidation of the controversy at hand are as follows:

3.1 Late Subedar Bhave was enrolled in the Army in the year 1960⁵ [On 21st July, 1960]. On 17th July, 1972, he got married to one Smt. Parvati who died in about two and a half years⁶ [On 26th January, 1975]. Thereafter, the deceased got married to one Smt. Anusuya⁷ [On 17th March, 1975]. During the subsistence of his marriage with Anusuya, he married appellant no. 1 herein⁸ [On 21st February, 1981]. Appellants No. 2 and 3 are the offspring of the deceased and appellant no. 1. On 25th January, 1984, the deceased was discharged from service at his request and was granted service pension at the rate of Rs. 376/- (Rupees three hundred seventy six only) per month. On 15th November, 1990, the deceased and Anusuya were granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent⁹ [M.C. No. 21/1990] and he paid a lump-sum amount of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) to her. Thereafter, the deceased approached the respondent No. 2 for deleting the name of Anusuya and endorsing the name of the appellant No. 1 in the PPO. He also submitted a certificate¹⁰ [Dated 08th October, 1994] issued by the Village Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bahirewadi, certifying that he and the appellant No. 1 had got married along with a copy of their wedding card as proof of the marriage.

3.2. Subedar Bhave expired in the year 2001¹¹ [On 12th January, 2001]. Thereafter, appellant No. 1 approached the respondents for grant of family pension¹² [Vide application dated 09th July, 2001]. The said request was, however, rejected by the respondents¹³ [Vide letter dated 01st October, 2001] on the ground that the deceased had got divorced in November, 1990, whereas the appellant No. 1 claimed to have got married to him in February, 1981, during the subsistence of the earlier marriage.

3.3. In 2005, the appellants instituted a civil suit for declaration praying inter-alia for issuing directions to the respondents to disburse the pensionary benefits payable on the demise of the deceased, Subedar Bhave. As noticed above, the trial Court decreed the said suit in favour of the appellants and held that they were entitled to receive the terminal benefits of the deceased, particularly, since no claim was ever laid on the said amount by his ex-wife Anusuya. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents preferred an appeal¹⁴ [Regular Appeal No. 70 of 2008], which was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge was set aside. The said order was assailed by the appellants in a Regular Second Appeal¹⁵ [Regular Second Appeal No. 6079 of 2010] that came to be dismissed by the High Court. Subsequently, on the basis of the Review Application, the court clarified¹⁶ [Vide order dated 16th October, 2014] that the appellants No. 2 and 3 herein would be entitled to the estate of Late Subedar Bh