IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5388 of 2010 1. SMT. ARCHANA DAS W/O LATE DEEPAK KUMAR EX. ASM OF PAGDHAL RAILWAY STATION OF DRM MADHYA PRADESH, AT PRESENT R/O H.NO.- 120 HEMKUNJ, CDA COLONY, PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE MANAGER CRM LIC OF INDIA, MUZAFFARPUR 3. SHRI VINOD TRIVEDI, THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE MUZAFFARPUR 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, CAB NAYATOLA, HOTEL AMBESSEDOR MUZAFFARPUR 5. SMT. BHAWANI DEVI W/O SHRI SHIV SHANKAR LAL PARAO POKHER, MOHALLA- MUZAFFARPUR ----------- 3 29/04/2010 Petitioner is wife of late Deepak Kumar who was working for the Indian Railways. There was an insurance policy taken by him. In the said policy he declared his mother to be the nominee. This was so because late Deepak Kumar was, probably, not married by then. After marriage no changes were effected or notified to the respondents Life Insurance Corporation of India. Unfortunately, Deepak Kumar passed away leaving behind his wife and a minor son. Petitioner claims her share even in the insurance claim but it was not given to her. Settlement of payment was made in favour of mother of her husband. Petitioner filed present writ - 2 - application seeking a direction upon the respondents to pay her her share. Stand of the respondents is that they have discharged their obligation under the Insurance Act keeping in mind section 39 of the Act and the nominee has been paid full and final settlement. They denied having any information or knowledge about the existence of the petitioner or her son, though the relationship is not disputed. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Shipra Sengupta Vs. Mridul Sengupta and others, reported in (2009) 10 SCC, 680 in support of her claim. In paragraph 14 of the said decision Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically held that the insurer has got a valid discharge of its liability under the policy. Payments are made to a nominee. However, claim can be made by the legal heirs in accordance with law of Succession. In other words, right of the petitioner to claim share is not extinguished in any manner merely because the payments have been made to the mother but for that the petitioner would require an appropriate declaration, may be by an appropriate court of appropriate jurisdiction. - 3 - This writ application stands disposed of with the above observation. AMIN (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)