SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

SMT. JAIWANTABAI W/O SHENUJI WANKHADE – Appellant
Versus
SUNANDA W/O GANESH DODE AND ANOTHER – Respondent
SA 144/2007



Advocates:
['SUMIT G JOSHI', '', 'FOR/P O A OF PETITIONER', 'ANIL MARDIKAR', 'AMIT JOSHI', 'NP LAMBAT/R-SOLE', '', 'VR CHOUDHARI/R- & RS SUNDARAM/R- ON DELAY', 'R- SERVED ON MERIT', 'NITIN P LAMBAT', 'FOR/R', 'JAGVIJAY SINGH BABUSINGH GANDHI', 'FOR/R']

-1-

SA.144.2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

SECOND APPEAL NO.144 OF 2007

APPELLANT:

Smt. Jaiwantabai w/o Shenuji Wankhade

aged about 59 years, Occupation: Labour,

resident of Panchashil Nagar, Akola,

District : Akola [Original Plaintiff as on R.A.]

… VERSUS ...

RESPONDENT:

1. Sunanda w/o Ganesh Dode,

Aged about 34 years, Occu : household work,

resident of c/o Ganesh Shaligram Dode

Zopadpatti area behind new S.T. Stand Akola

Tahsil and District : Akola.

2. Divisional Railway Manager [p], Central

Railway Bhusawal, Tahsil Bhusawal,

District : Jalgaon.

[Respondent no.1 and 2 are original

Defendants no.1 and 2 as on R.A.]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shri Ved Deshpande h/f Shri A.S. Mardikar, Senior Advocate for the Appellant

Shri J.B. Gandhi, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

Shri N.P. Lambat, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.

RESERVED ON : 4

th AUGUST

, 2021

PRONOUNCED ON : 23

rd

AUGUST, 2021

JUDGMENT:-

Heard learned Advocate Shri Ved Deshpande for the

Appellant, learned Advocate Shri J.B. Gandhi for respondent No.1 and

-2-

SA.144.2007

learned Advocate Shri N.P. Lambat for respondent No.2.

02]

This Court while admitting the appeal has framed following

substantial question of law—

a)“whether a widow can claim the estate of the husband after

re-marriage”?

At that time, this Court has referred to the judgment in the case of Smt.

Kasturi Devi Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation & Others

1. I have

perused that judgment. It is no doubt true that “the effect of

re-marriage on her right to claim share in the property” was considered

in that judgment. However, the status of that woman was that of a

mother and not of a widow. So to say there was a claim for inheritance

not as a widow but as mother. It has been held that there will not be

any effect on her share of inheritance from a son even after she

re-married. Whereas in the case before us the issue is what is the effect

on widow’s right of inheritance (not in the property of a son) on the

property of the deceased husband.

03]

The present appellant is the mother of the deceased-Anil

Shenuji Wankhade. He was working as a pointsman with Indian

Railways. He was married to present respondent No.1. Parties will be

referred to by their original status before the trial Court.

1

AIR 1976 SC 2595

-3-

SA.144.2007

04]

Anil Wankhade expired in an accident on 19th April, 1991. He

was entitled for dues from the Indian Railways. Deceased-Anil

nominated his wife/defendant-Sunanda. It has come on record that

there was a dispute in between deceased-Anil and wife-Sunanda. She

was staying away from the husband-Anil.

05]

After the death of husband-Anil, defendant-Sunanda

re-married in the month of May, 1991 with one Ganesh Saligram Dode.

Plaintiff-Jaiwantabai claimed dues from the Indian Railways in the

year 1993. She also informed to the employer about re-marriage of

defendant-Sunanda. Indian Railways/employer demanded a certificate

of marriage. However, it could not be submitted. Employer disbursed

dues of Rs.65,000/- in favour of defendant-Sunanda.

06]

As plaintiff-Jaiwantabai could not find favour from the

employer, she filed a suit before the Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Akola. She sought declaration about status of defendant-Sunanda and

also injunction restraining the employer from paying the dues to

defendant-Sunanda.

07]

The plaintiff gave evidence and examined herself and two

witnesses namely Shrirang Ingde-PW-2 (who was aware about strained

relationship in between the spouses and cohabitation with second

husband)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top