The benefits derived from compassionate appointment do not constitute part of the inherited estate under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.

ORDER :

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

Heard.

1. This appeal arises out of order dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Family Court, by which, the appellant's application under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act against the respondent daughter-in-law has been rejected.

2. An application for grant of maintenance under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act was filed by the appellant before the Family Court on the pleadings that after death of appellant's husband, her son Rupwalkant Thakre was granted compassionate appointment. He also died in the year 2012 and thereafter, compassionate appointment was granted to his widow Priya Thakre, who happens to be the appellant's daughter-in-law.

3. While accepting compassionate appointment, respondent had undertaken before the employer authorities that she would be paying appropriate amount of money as agreed to between her and the appellant.

4. Case of the appellant was that the appellant being lonely destitute widow, is entitled to receive maintenance as dependent from respondent daughter-in-law, who is in employment under scheme of compassionate appointment, upon death of her husband.

5. That application was opposed by the respondent daughter-in-law by submitting that as none of the estate of the deceased husband of the appellant devolved upon her, nor has she derived income therefrom, she is not statutorily obliged under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act to maintain the mother-in-law. It was also stated that appellant has two sons namely, Yadusudan and Tarun Kumar, both are in employment and are getting Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- respectively as monthly salary and instead of seeking maintenance from her own sons, she has preferred application for grant of maintenance from her daughter-in-law.

6. Learned Family Court, recording a finding that application under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act was not maintainable as it could not be proved that the appellant was entitled to receive her share out of any estate of her deceased husband, received by respondent daughter-in-law, the application was rejected.

7. Assailing correctness and validity of aforesaid order, learned counsel for the appellant would argue that respondent daughter-in-law got compassionate appointment upon death of her husband Rupwalkant, the son of the appellant. He would argue that Rupwalkant was granted compassionate appointment after death of his father Dharamraj, who was the husband of the appellant. In this manner, respondent daughter-in-law received compassionate appointment which traces back to appellant's husband Dharamraj. Next submission is that earnings derived from compassionate appointment are estate within the meaning of that word as contained in section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956. He would also submit that the scheme of legislation being beneficent one, the word 'estate' requires to be interpreted in liberal manner so as to include every benefit which is received as flowing from the estate of the deceased including grant of compassionate appointment, which was granted to husband of the respondent as the son of deceased father Dharamraj.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent, opposing prayer, submits that the benefits derived under compassionate appointment are not assets of deceased Dharamraj. He would submit that word 'estate' occurring in section 22 has to be understood in its normal, grammatical meaning and benefits derived from compassionate appointment could not be included as estate of the deceased.

9. We have learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and the impugned record.

10. The entire dispute revolves around as to whether the appellant is entitled to get maintenance from respondent daughter-in-law. She is entitled to get maintenance under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, it is therefore, relevant to examine statutory scheme of section 22 of the Act of 1956.

Section 22 is extracted here