JUDGMENT

This second appeal has been filed challenging the reversal findings of the lower appellate court under its judgement and decree dated 25.02.2005 passed in A.S.No.183 of 2004 by which, the suit filed by the Appellant/plaintiff in O.S.No.1849 of 1998 came to be dismissed.

2. The Appellant is the plaintiff in the suit O.S.No.1849 of 1998 on the file of the XVI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. She filed a suit against the respondents 1 & 2/defendants 1 & 2 seeking for the following reliefs:

(a) for mandatory injunction declaring that she is the legally wedded wife of late P.Kasi;

(b) for mandatory injunction directing the first respondent/first defendant to return back the original compromise agreement dated 19.02.1998 executed by the Appellant/plaintiff out of force and compulsion;

(c) for permanent injunction restraining the first respondent/first defendant for obtaining terminal and death benefit of P.Kasi from the second defendant.

3. It is the case of the Appellant/plaintiff as seen from the plaint that she is the legally wedded wife of late P.Kasi who was employed with the Indian Railways till his death on 11.04.1997. According to her, she was nominated as a nominee by her husband late P.Kasi in the Railway records and after his death, she submitted her representation on 15.05.1997 seeking for settlement of terminal and death benefits of her late husband P.Kasi in her favour.

4. A counter claim has been made by the first respondent/first defendant before the Indian Railways claiming that she is the legally wedded wife and she is alone entitled for the terminal benefits of late P.Kasi. Since the Appellant/plaintiff was unable to get the terminal and death benefit of P.Kasi from the respondents 2 and 3 who are his employers, the Appellant/plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No.1849 of 1998.

5. A written statement was also filed by the first respondent/first defendant in the said suit denying the allegations of the Appellant/plaintiff and stating that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased P.Kasi and not the Appellant/plaintiff. According to her, she alone is entitled to get the terminal and death benefits of late P.Kasi from the respondents 2 and 3.

6. Issues were framed by the trial court and the trial court after trial by judgment and decree dated 19.03.2003 passed in O.S.No.1849 of 1998 decreed the suit in favour of the Appellant/plaintiff by declaring that the Appellant/plaintiff is the legally wedded wife of the deceased P.Kasi and has also granted consequential relief sought for in the suit. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 19.03.2003 passed in O.S.No.1849 of 1998, the first respondent/first defendant preferred an appeal before the lower appellate court namely the District and Sessions Court, (Fast Track Court-

1), Chennai in A.S.No.183 of 2004.

7. By Judgment and Decree dated 25.02.2005 passed in A.S.No.183 of 2004, the lower appellate court reversed the findings of the trial court by dismissing the suit O.S.No.1849 of 1998 filed by the Appellant/plaintiff. The lower appellate court has allowed the appeal filed by the first respondent/first defendant based upon the evidence of DW3 and DW4 who are the daughters of the Appellant/plaintiff. The lower appellate court in its judgment and decree dated 25.02.2005 passed in A.S.No.183 of 2004 though holding that DW3 and DW4 were borne to the Appellant/plaintiff has reversed the findings of the trial court by holding that the daughters namely DW3 and DW4 are alone entitled to receive the retirement benefits of late P.Kasi excluding the Appellant/plaintiff. The lower appellate court has however, accepted the findings of the trial court that the first respondent/first defendant is not the legally wedded wife of the deceased P.Kasi.

8. The lower appellate court reversed the findings of the trial court only based on Ex.P10 dated 18.02.1998 which is a no objection letter given by the daughters of the Appellant/plaintiff namely DW3 and DW4 authorising the firs