O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conference)

The revision has been filed against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.889 of 2011 in O.S.No.194 of 2010 dated 01.03.2012 on the file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai, dismissing the petition filled under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C seeking to reject the plaint.

2. The brief facts of the case:

The revision petitioner is the 1st defendant in the original suit.

The 1st respondent/plaintiff had filed O.S.No.194 of 2010 against the revision petitioner and three other defendants with a prayer to set aside the decree of divorce dissolving the marriage of the plaintiff with Late.P.G.Gopal, passed in O.P.No.75 of 1981 dated 30th July 1981 on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, and to declare the marriage of the revision petitioner / 1st defendant with the deceased Late.P.G.Gopal as illegal and subsequently to direct the 2nd and 3rd defendants to sanction 50% of the eligible family pension of the deceased P.G.Gopal to the 1st respondent/plaintiff from 01.11.2009 without cost. 3. It is the case of the plaintiff that she is the legally wedded wife of Late.P.G.Gopal and their marriage was solemnized on 08.06.1960 at Pattipulam Village, Tirupporur, as per Hindu Rites and Customs and that they have got two children out of the marriage. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the deceased P.G.Gopal was employed as a Compositor in the Government Central Press, Department of Stationery and Printing, Mint Building, Chennai-79, and retired on 31.05.1991 and he died on 16.03.2006. The plaintiff claimed that she is 100% illiterate and she was informed about the death of her husband only after his cremation by the 1st defendant. Thereafter, she was very much shocked, disappointed and mentally inactive. Subsequently, when she recovered, she approached the Government authorities for sanction of family pension of her late husband P.G.Gopal in the year 2009 and it was informed that the family pension has already been sanctioned to the 1st defendant and that the said Late P.G.Gopal had already got a decree of divorce against the plaintiff by an exparte order dated 30.07.1981 vide O.P.No.75 of 1981 on the file of the VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the said decree of divorce had been obtained on the ground of desertion by playing fraud when the said Late.P.G.Gopal was living with her in the same house. Even after the decree of divorce, her husband Late P.G.Gopal was living with her and that the decree was not given effect to till his death. It is her further case that she was aware of the illegal relationship between her husband and the 1st defendant, but she did not know that her husband had married the 1st defendant subsequent to the decree of divorce. Further it had been averred that the decree of divorce could have been obtained for two reasons viz. 1) On the insistence of the 1st defendant to receive the retirement / death benefits of Late P.G.Gopal, 2) to save his skin from the departmental disciplinary proceeding for bigamy. It is her further case that the 1st defendant was fully aware of the entire divorce proceedings and she was a party to the fraud and cheating played on the life of the plaintiff. It is further averred that when the plaintiff made a hue and cry on the information that the 1st defendant was drawing the family pension of Late. P.G.Gopal, the 1st defendant had offered her 50% of the eligible family pension of P.G.Gopal to silence her and had sent Rs.1000/- every month through money order. This fact has also been admitted by the 1st defendant through her lawyer's reply dated 18.11.2009 and this payment was stopped subsequently. Further the plaintiff had claimed that her husband P.G.Gopal had nominated the 1st defendant to receive the family pension taking advantage of the decree of divorce which was obtained by fraud. The plaintiff claimed that the nomination is invali