IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 MFA.No. 196 of 2005(A) --------------------------------------- WCA.605/2005 of W.C.C.,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT(S): APPLICANT. --------------------------------------- S.RAJESWARI AMMA, PADMAVILASAM VEEDU, C.M.C. X WARD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA) RESPONDENT(S): EMPLOYER & OPPO.PARTIES. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL FINANCE MANAGER. 2. SANTHA, PRASSERIL VEEDU, VAYALAR P.O. CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. 3. NANIKUTTY AMMA, PARASSERIL VEEDU, VAYALAR P.O. CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ FOR R2 SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY FOR R2 THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.(WCC). NO. 196 OF 2005 A --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd June, 2009 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The Appeal is filed against the order dated 29.8.2005 of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. The claim of the appellant for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of one late P.R. Parameswaran Nair is the subject matter of this Appeal. According to the appellant, late P.R. Parameswaran Nair married the appellant on 6.2.1983 in accordance with the Hindu rites and she was residing with him and, therefore, she is entitled to the amount due to the dependents under the Workmen's Compensation Act. 2. Actually, earlier the Senior Divisional Manager, Southern Railway had deposited in the Court of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, a sum of Rs.1,36,560/= as compensation payable to the dependents of MFA(WCC).196/05A 2 deceased P.R. Parameswaran Nair, Senior Trackman who died in an accident while employed in the Southern Railway. On the basis of the Report of the Assistant Labour Officer that respondents 2 and 3 herein were the wife and mother of the deceased P.R. Parameswaran Nair, a Notification was issued inviting additional claimants. No one came forward. It was after examining the dependents on 10.3.2005 the compensation was distributed to the dependents. This was done pursuant to the order dated 17.3.2005. The Commissioner has, in the impugned order, referred to the deposition of the appellant and found that the deceased had legally married the second respondent. By the impugned order, it is found that the alleged marriage between the deceased and the appellant is without divorcing the first wife and after the coming into force of the Hindu Marriage Act, the wife through a bigamous marriage is not entitled to the status of a widow for the purpose of claiming compensation. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and MFA(WCC).196/05A 3 respondents 2 and 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant had entered into marriage in 1983 and more than seven years had gone by and the whereabouts of the second respondent were not known and, therefore, the appellant should have been given the compensation. Learned counsel respondents 2 and 3 correctly points out that an Appeal can be maintained only if a substantial question of law is raised. He would also point out that this is a case where, in fact, late P.R. Parameswaran Nair had settled some valuable property in favour of the appellant also. Therefore, he is canvassing that neither legal, nor grounds of justice are made out in the case of the appellant. 4. A part of the deposition of the appellant is extracted in the order. It is very clear from the deposition that the appellant admits that late P.R. Parameswaran Nair had contracted legal marriage with the second respondent. There is no case that late P.R. Parameswaran Nair divorced the second respondent before contracting the alleged second marriage of the appellant. This MFA(WCC).196/05A 4 means that, in law, it is not open to the appellant to lay a claim for compensation. Further more, as contended by the learned counsel for the respondent, by virtue of the order dated 17.3.2005, apparently the dependents of deceased P.R. Parameswaran Nair were determined as the second and third respondents and it is not in dispute that the amount of compensation has already been disbursed to respondents 2 and 3 pursuant to the order. The said order is not in challenge before us. In such circumstances, we feel there is no merit in the Appeal and we dismiss the same. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge