##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:22689

Order reserved on 30.01.2026

Order pronounced on 13.05.2026

Digitally

signed by

PAWAN P KA UW MA AN R Order uploaded on 14.05.2026

KUMAR Date:

2026.05.14

17:03:17

+0530

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WP227 No. 112 of 2025

Smt. Anuradha Rao W/o Late C.S. Rao, aged about 72 years R/o - Quarter

No. 15d, Street No. S.P.A. Sector- 5, Bhilai Nagar Tahsil and District- Durg

(C.G.)

...Petitioner/Defendant No. 2

versus

1. C. Akash Murty S/o Late C. N. Murty, aged about 27 years R/o M.P.A.

Quarter No. 15d, Sector- 5 Bhilai Nagar Tahsil and District- Durg (C.G.)

2. C. Piyush Murty S/o Late C. N. Murty, aged about 23 years R/o M.P.A.

Quarter No. 15d, Sector- 5 Bhilai Nagar Tahsil and District- Durg (C.G.)

(Plaintiffs)

3. Director In-Charge Bhilai Steel Plant Steel Bhawan Main Gate Bhilai

Tahsil and District- Durg (C.G.) (Defendant No. 1) (As per Court Order Dated

06-08-2025

... Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Shrestha Gupta, Advocate

For Respondents 1&2 : Shri B.P. Singh and Shri Arpit Agrawal,

Advocates

For Respondent No. 3 : Shri Himanshu Pandey, Advocate

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput)

C A V Order

2

The petitioner in this case happens to be the mother and the

respondents No. 1 and 2 – the sons of deceased employee namely C.N.

Murthy who was working as a Senior Co-operative-cum-Technician with

respondent No.3 herein. Said employee died in harness on 21.11.2009. As

respondents No. 1 and 2 – the sons were minor, the deceased employee had

got recorded in the service book the name of the present petitioner as his

nominee, and accordingly on his death all the service benefits were granted

to her.

2. Being legal representatives of the deceased employee, the

respondents-sons filed an application for grant of succession in the

competent Court of law, which came to be allowed vide order dated

25.02.2019 and thus the petitioner and respondents No. 1 and 2 were held to

be entitled to get 1/3rd share each from the service benefits of the deceased

employee. Said order was affirmed in appeal as well vide order dated

25.11.2009. It is however averred in the petition that in spite of succession

application being allowed, the respondent No.3 paid pension in favour of the

present petitioner. Respondents – sons then took recourse to filing of Civil

Suit for declaration along with an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and

2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’) praying for staying the

pension being paid to the petitioner. Vide order dated 20.09.2023 learned trial

Court found that the balance of convenience tilted in favour of the

respondents-sons and thus allowed the application filed under Order XXXIX

Rule 1 and 2 CPC restraining respondent No.3 from making payment of

pension to the petitioner herein, till the disposal of the suit. Appellate Court

vide its order dated 27.11.2024 also affirmed the order of the trial Court dated

3

20.09.2023 granting stay in favour of the respondents – sons. It is this order

which is under challenge in this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated

27.11.2024 which is under challenge in this petition is illegal, arbitrary and

contrary to law and therefore liable to be set aside. He submits that both the

Courts below have committed a serious error of law in staying the monthly

pension which was being paid by respondent No.3 in favour of the petitioner

as the deceased employee himself had got her name recorded as the

nominee in his service book. He further submits that the petitioner at present

is aged about 72 years and being fully dependent on the monthly pension

would be rendered quite helpless to survive in the wake of the order

impugned, and for that in the interest of justice the same needs to be set

aside. According to the counsel for the petitioner, both the Courts below have

ignored to consider the fact that during the lifetime of the deceased employee

the mother of the respondents No. 1 and 2 had refused to visit the petitioner

who happened to be her mother-in-law and