The High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition uncier section i o1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, irre High court may be preaseJ to suspend the operation of the judgment and decree passing os.trto. t i+ of 2012 dt.5-12-2118 of the Family Court-cum-Vl Additional District Judge, Khammam Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. SRINIVASA RAO MADIRAJU Counsel for the Respondent No.'t : SRI VANI KANDARPA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 : SRI A RADHA KRISHNA The Court delivered the following : Judgment THE ]AON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA' YARA APPEAL SUIT No.46 of2Ol9 JUDGMENT: Herud liri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju' learned coui11[]el for the appellantsrdel'crdant Nos l lo 3' Smt' Vani Kandarprr' lcarned counsel for re s l;oncie nt No 1 / plaintiff ancl Sri A Radha Krishna' learned cor'lnse lor respondent Nos 2 to 4/defendant Nos''+ to 6' This is; an appeal preferred by the appellan'-sl defendant 2. Nos.1 to l) zLgg,rieved by the judgrnent and decree ol tllc learned Judge, Family Court-cum VI Additional District 'Judge at Khammanr, dat:cl 05. l2'2}la in O S No 174 of suit filed lbr de <:laring respondent No-1/plaintiff as legaLl heir of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar has bcen decreed' Further' cle':reed that respondent No. l/plaintiff is cntr[led for the death be nefits and directed respor-rcent Nos.2 to 4/defendant Nos,4 tr'; 6 1-o release the ' rT 'l-rereby ">-O72 death benr:flts of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar in favour of respondent No. 1 / plaintifl

3. Frtr tht sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to as ttret' are arrayed in O.S.No.174 of 2t)72 Facts ofthe case: 4 Defenlant No.1 is the 1st '.l,ife and defe:rdant Nos.2 and 3 are the childrt:n of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar. trefendarrt No.1 was q \ 7 I 2 married to Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar on 14.03.I9g2 and defendant Nos.2 and 3 were born on 25.04. 19g5 and 11.06. 1990 respectively. Due to disputes, defendant No. 1 filed M.C.No.42 of 1991 under section 125 of cr.p.c seeking maintenance. wh e so, Late varanasi Ravi Kumar hled O.p.No.7 4 of 1995 on the hle of the Senior Civil Judge, Bheemavaram seeking dissolution of marriage. The said O.p was dismissed and Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar preferred C.M.A.No.2341 of 1999 on the file of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the state of Andhra Pradesh to set aside the dismissal order.

5. When the said CMA was pending, Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar married the plaintiff on t9 .O4.2OO0 at Sri Raja Rajeswari Temple, Rotary Nagar, Khammam as per Hindu rites and customs. Aggrieved by the same, defendant No. 1 filed a criminal case vide C.C.No.293 of 2006 under Section 494 of Cr.p.C alleging that her husband married the plaintiff during subsistence of her marriage. while the things stood thus, in the year 2o0g, the erders have brought about settlement between defendant Nos. I to 3 and Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar whereby Late Ravi Kumar paid an amount of to defendant Nos. 1 to 3 towards full and frnal their share 1n his properties. In a reciprocal defendant No. 1 withdrew her bigamy case i.e. I settlement of Rs.8,0O,OOO/- arrangement, .\ ) 3 incorporating thc Irk Adalat- at C.C.No.293 of 2()06 on the fi1e of the Judicial Magistratt': of First Class, Bheemave ram. Further, try frling a memo' thc (lMA was allowed. The afrl rementioned settlement was presented trefore the Bheemavaram and an award u'as' passed te rms of settlement. Meanwhile, as per t he orders of 2010 on the file of the Senior rlli- il Judge' in H.M.O.P.No. til Bheemavaram, the marriage between defendanl: No 1 and her husband rr,as di.lsolved. Thus, defendant No.1 cellsed t-o be u'ife of Late Ravi Kttmir--. Thereafter, on 03' 12'2O10' Varanasi Rz'vi Kumar died leaving be lrincl the plaintiff as his sole su(lcessor' After the death of Ravi I(umar, the plaintiff hled the suit for d':cl aratron to declare her as t .re 1egal heir of Late Ravi Kumar ilnd ccn sequential relief of entitlcrncnt to seek death benefits and other emoiuments of Late Varanasi fi,lvi Kumar. The defendant Nos l to 3 made appeararlce bcrlore the trial 6. Court and filccl r,r'ritten statement claiming to be legal he'irs of Late RaviKumar.Further,deniedthelegaistatusoftheJrlzrir.:tiffzrswife of Late ReLvi I'.rrmar as her marriage with Late Ravi K umar took place during tl-re subsistence of the defendant Nc' 1 's rna rriage with her husband. Defendant No.1 denied the marriagc br:rtween the plaintiff and tLt:r husband and also relinquishir-rg her r;hare. The defendants plea ded that the piaintiff is not entitled tc c, aim death \ t I A 4 benehts of late Ravi Kumar as relinquishment is a nominal document which does not debar them from claiming the death benehts.

7. Defendant No.4 hled written statemeni and the same is adopted by defendant Nos.S and 6. Defendant Nos.4 to 6 pleaded that they have no interest in the inter-se disputes between the plaintiff and defendant No.l and are ready to pay death benefits to any person as directed by the Court.

8. On the basis of rival pleadings, the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-Vl Additional District Judge at Khammam, framed the following three issues for trial: 1) 2l Whether the plaintiff is e ntitled for declaration as legal heir and successor of her husband Varanqsi Ravi Kumar for entitlement of death benefits and other emoluments? Whether the plaintiff is entitled for mandatory injunction directing D4 to D6 not to pay any amounts to Dl to D3? 3) To what relief.2

9. During trial, on behalf of the plaintiff, witnesses PWl to PW3 were examined and documents Ex.A I to A 1 1 marked. Per contra, defendant No.1 hled her chief examination afhdavit but did not appear for cross examination. Any amount of time and \

1. { 5 opportunity given were not availed to lead evidence l;y d efendant No.1. In the circrt nstances, the learned Judge, Family Cour t-cum-Vl Additional Distri,:t .ludge at Khammam closed the evirlence of defendants and Jrassed judgment on the basis of the er-i<lence got adduced b]' the plaintiff declaring her as the Ie gal heir- of Late Varanasi Ravi I(t mar and directed defendant Nos 4 to b to release the death ltenefir,s of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar in fa'ror'lr o[ the plaintiff. There \vere incidental proceedings of filing of Transfer petitiorr vjclt' Tr.().P.No.429 of 2O18 and the same u'ere dLsmissed' Since no appeal s are preferred, the impugned judp;ment artd decree became fin:rl. ASllrievecl by the impugned judgment and dt':cree, the present appeal irt prelerred by the defendants. Content ions of the aDpellants/ defendant Nos. 1 to 3:

10. The deft:'rdant Nos.1 to 3 contended that the lcarnr:d Judge, Family Courr-ctLtn-Vl Additional District Judge at Kharrrmam failed to consider the 1z ct that the marriage of the plaintilf ri'as solemnized on 19. O4.20OO c uring subsistence of marriage br:tu'eetl ' lefendant No. I rvith ]-ate t/aranasi Ravi Kumar and there lore' [hr': plzrintiff cannot be <lecleL|cd as his successor or iegal heil-. As pr:r service record of Late ! aranasi Ravi Kumar, the name of Cefendar-rt No' 1 is entered as his nc minee. Further, the service record shos's .lefendant Nos.l to 3 as rominees and therefore, no one erlse is; c ntitled to receive the death benefits of Late Varanasi Ravi K umar. l )efer-rdant ),,2 6 Nos.2 and 3 are the sons of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar ald their rights cannot be barred on the basis of Ex.A4 Award passed by the Mandal Legal Services Authority, Bhee mavaram. Hence, the appellants/defendant Nos.1 to 3 prayed that the impugned judgment and decree be set aside. Contentions of resDondent No.1/olaintiff I 1. Plaintiff contended that marriage between defendant No. 1 and her husband is no longer in subsistence on account of various cases Iiled by both the partres followed by recording of the Lok Adalat award dated 20.O9.2OO8. It is emphasi zed that as per the Lok Adalat award, a compromise was reached between the parties. It is further emphasized that the parties i.e. plaintiff and Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar with his parents on one hand and the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 on the other hand have come to a compromise that Rs.8,0O,000/- would be paid towards full and flnal settlement to defendant Nos. 1 to 3. It is argued that as per said award, both parties agreed for withdrawal of CMA before the High Court and for getting consent divorce decree by filing memo and for withdrawal of the criminal case filed under Section 494 of IpC. The award has been recorded and therefore, argued that the impugned judgrnent and decree passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-cum-Vl Additional District Judge at Khammam could not be set aside on technical grounds. I I l Analvsi! of the Court:

12. The firs: and foremost point to be considered is thLat as per judgment of the l-lon'ble Supreme Court of India irL Vidhyadhar vs. Manikrao and anotherr, when a party to a suit does not present himself or herself for adducing oral evidence atrd to fz.Lce cross examination, thr: pleadings cannot be considered.

13. In thc instant case, defendant Nos.1 to 3/ appr:llarrts herein in spite of givir-re sulficient opportunity failed to iLppeilr t:efore the learncd Judge, I'amrly Court cum-Vl Additional lf istrict ..ludge at Khammam lor lt:rrding oral evidence. Defendant No.1 failerl to enter the witness bc>. to support her pleadings and therefore the pleadings of the u.ritten statement are to be l aken ar; nullity. Consequenth-, th:r matter has to be decided only o -r the ba sis of the pleadings and e',idcnce adduced by the plaintiff. F.s per tl e case of thc piaintiff herr;,:l[, defendant No.1 is the 1"t wife of l-ate Varanasi Ravi Kumar l-ravirg married him on 14.O3.19a2 and has given birth to defendant Nos.2 and 3 out of wed lock. I)ue to disputes, defendant No. 1 filed M.C.No.42 of 1991 seeking rrainten:rncc and Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar hled O.P.No.74 of 1995 seeking dissolution ol marriage. The said M.C was allowed and thr: O.P was dismissed. I-ate I{avi Kumar was paying maintena nce to r:lefendant tir999y: sc'r: sl: \ .\ 8 {r Nos. 1 to 3. Subsequently, vide orders dated 2g.10.2010 in H.M.O.P.No. 13 of 2O10, the marriage between defendant No. 1 and Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar was dissolved. While the disputes and legal proceedings were pending before the varioqs courts, Late Ravi Kumar married the plaintiff on r9.o4.200o. After dissorution of the marriage on 28.10.2010, Late Ravi Kumar died on 03.12.2010. At this juncture, the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration as legal heir and entitlement to death benehts and emoluments of Late Ravi Kumar.

14. The learned Judge, Family Court cum VI Additional District Judge at Khammam on the basis of evidence adduced by the plaintiff decreed the suit in her favour and the same is challenged by the defendant Nos.1 to 3 alleging that the marriage of the plaintiff with the deceased Ravi Kumar took place while the marriage between defendant No. 1 and Late Ravi Kumar was Further, it is the case of the defendants that the names of defendants are recorded in the service register and therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled for the death benefits. This Court does not see any strength in the case of the defendants in the light of contents of the Lok Adalat award dated, 2O.O9.200g marked under Ex.A4. The Lok Adalat award dated 2O.O}.2OOB makes it crystal .teJ1 tnrt the defendants have agreed to settle all the legal disputes subsisting. / 9 on payment of I s.8,OO,OOO/ - to defendant Nos l to 3 as fu1l and hnal settlernent On payment of said amount' it ir; agreecl between the parties that :lcfendant No. 1 would withdraw I he crirrrinal case registered under- Scction 494 of IPC and that she will fik' a memo before the Famil' Court for settling the said case with t'ot 'sent For passing of a de : ree of divorce and that Late Varz'nasi Ra vi Kumar would settlc thc case in C.M.A'No'2341 of 1999 before the High Court Upon r:::orcling of said award for all practical 1lu:'poses' all

15. the outstanding family, legal and monetary tlispur-es bctwccn defendants ancl Latc Varanasi Ravi Kumar wele seLtl(]d A Lok Adalatau,ardc.:rrieswithitalegalsanctity'saidawardcannotbe appealed ancl is final in nature. Defendant No' t has zisr;erted her rights and se..1led the matter before a competent fr rrum and therefore, she t:irnnot turn a blind eye to the un<1erta1':inr3 given by herbeforethetokAclalatandContestthesuitfc,rdcclarationfiled by the plair-rtiff.

16. In tl-rc instant case, the contents of the L rk Adalat au.ard/ Ex. A4 sL.ou. that there was full and fina1 settlcrne:11 bctween the partics rvith no further claims by defendants against the plaintiff or Late Varanesri Ravi Kumar. The only spoiler for the plaintiff has bQen death of '/aranasi Ravi Kumar within two rr: onths; ol obtaining t/ I l0 the decree of divorce with defendant No. 1. Had Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar being alive, the question of giving his retirement benelits to his sons would be in doubt as there was a full and final settlement between the pa rties.

17. With regard to the names of defendants being recorded in the service register of Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar, it is to be seen that until the decree of divorce was passed on 2g.10.2010, there was no occasion for Late Ravi Kumar to change the names of nominees. It is quiet probable that Late Ravi Kumar never anticipated his death within 1 month 5 days of obtaining decree of divorce. There wourd have been no occasion for him to change the name of nominees in his service register. In view of the undertakrng given by the defendants before a competent forum like l,ok Adalat, since the Lok Adalat award is hnal which cannot be appealed, this Court does not see any reason to interfere with the undertakings given by the respective parties while settling of the disputes. In view of the Lok Adalat Award dated 2O.O9 .2OOB, obtaining a decree of divorce dissolution was mere a formality. Only on technical ground that the decree of dissolution was not passed as on the date of marriage of plaintiff with Late Varanasi Ravi Kumar, there is no other ground to seek any relief by defendant Nos.1 to 3. ) ) The dele ndant Nos' 1 to 3 with ful1 knorvledge albout the 18. unclertaking givt::'r by them before the Lok Adalat are obs'trl tcting the benehts to be accrued by the plaintiff on hyper tt:chnical grounds' The dcfendant l.lrs.l to 3 are under legal obligaticn to abide by the undertakin g gl't:n by them before the Lok Adaiat i e receipt of Rs.8,00,O00/ torvards futl and The appellants / defe r dant Nos. 1 to 3 cannot claim any ot.he r benehts subsequenl lv orlv by taking advantage of death of Varzrnasi Ravi Kumar. Hencc, this Court does not see any reaso n to intlrlere with the impr-rgnecl . r tdgment ancl decree passed by tJ-re lezrrr'ed 'ludge' Family Court c.-lm-IV Additional District Judge at Khzrrrrrram' dated ;ettle::-re nt

05.12.2018 in () S.No.l74 of 2012' In the I e sttlt, the Appeai Suit is dismiss:d N r ( 'rder as to As a s'.:rpel, all the pending miscellaneous apoli':ations are //TRUE COPY// snr- M MANJULA I o-tUr neCtsrmn l I $ecrtot't oFFlcER i\ '.J Lg . closed To,

1. 2. 3 4 5. Two CD CoPters B*|EE**1*xffxli,ffi-tr'ffifr,;ii#*'r jE''*"' L./_ 4\ '4, or 't .$ s, +s. HIGH GOURT RYJ DATED:111O412025 +DECREE JUDGMENT AS.No.46 of 2019 i:-1 a) { I .:) \'; \ DISMISISNG THE I,]'PEAL WITHOUT COSTS 1 \ 6