Nomination in insurance does not confer absolute rights over terminal benefits, which pertain to legal heirs under succession laws.

JUDGMENT :

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:

Under above circumstances, it is therefore prayed that your lordship may kindly be gracious enough to admit the writ application and issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties No.1 & 2 and direct them to release the settlement of death claims and terminal benefits as well as other deposits dues of the deceased husband – Sri Subhransu Mohanty payable to the Petitioner as entitled to get from the Bank, being legally married wife of the deceased husband and thereby quashing the letter dated 30.11.2023 issued by the Divisional Manager, Canara Bank under Annexure-6 for the interest of justice.

And any other order/orders, direction/directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the Petitioner;

And for which act of kindness, the Petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner is the legal married wife of late Subhransu Mohanty, the marriage having been taken place as per Hindu rites and customs on 06.07.2014. It is also contended that out of the wedlock of the Petitioner with late Subharansu Mohanty, Petitioner was blessed with a daughter.

2.1. However, seeking a Decree for dissolution of the marriage, Petitioner’s late husband moved the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar in C.P. No.634 of 2015. On being noticed in the aforesaid proceeding, Petitioner duly appeared and made an application for grant of interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The said application was allowed by the learned Family Judge and deceased husband of the Petitioner was directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs.10, 200/- w.e.f 09.08.2016. Learned Family Judge also directed for payment of Rs.3, 000/- towards cost of the litigation vide order dt.18.11.2017 under Annexure-2.

2.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that during pendency of the proceeding, Petitioner’s husband however died on 18.09.2023. On such death of her husband, Petitioner moved an application before the learned Family Judge inter alia with a prayer to drop the proceeding in C.P. No.634 of 2015. The said application was allowed by the learned Family Judge vide order dt.11.10.2023 under Annexure-3 series. Order dt.11.10.2023 was never assailed also.

2.3. It is contended that since Petitioner’s late husband was working under the Opp. Party-Bank, on the death of her husband on 18.09.2023, Petitioner made an application on 21.09.2023 under Annexure-4, inter alia with a prayer to release all the death benefits as due to the deceased employee in her favour. As no action was taken on such application of the Petitioner, Petitioner again made another application on 12.12.2023 enclosing therein the Death Certificate of her husband as well as the order passed by the learned Family Judge on 11.10.2023, wherein the Proceeding filed by the deceased husband in C.P. No.634 of 2015 was treated as dropped.

2.4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that vide the impugned letter dt.30.11.2023 under Annexure-6, when Petitioner was intimated that terminal benefit of her late husband will be dealt with as per the provision of the Nomination Rules of the Bank/RBI/Government, on the ground that the deceased employee had registered his mother as a nominee, challenging such communication of the bank, so issued under Annexure-6, the present Writ Petition was filed.

2.5. It is contended that this Court while issuing notice of the matter vide order dt.20.12.2023, passed an interim order to the effect that no further action, pursuan