IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6619 of 2009 ANUPAM BHARTI, wife of Late-Alok Kumar, resident of village-Kaindi, P.S.-Halsi, P.O.-Halsi, District-Lakhisarai at present C/o-Sri. Hargauri Singh, Quarter No. 749/C, Daulatpur Colony, P.S.-Jamalpur, P.O.- Jamalpur, District-Munger. ……..Petitioner Versus 1. The Life Insurance Corporation of India, through the Senior Divisional Manager, Bhagalpur Division, Priyadarshani Sakhichand Ghat Road, Naya Bazar, Bhagalpur-812002. 2. The Manager (C.R.M) L.I.C. Bhagalpur, Divisional Office, Priyadarshani Sakhichand Ghat Road, Nagar Bazar, Bhagalpur. 3. Sr. Branch Manager, L.I.C., Lakhisarai, District-Lakhisarai. 4. The Branch Manager, L.I.C., Lakhisarai Branch, Awadh Complex, Ist Floor, New Market, Lakhisarai, District-Lakhisarai. 5. Smt. Saroj Devi, wife of Late-Nawal Kishore Prasad, resident of village- and post-Kaindi, P.S.-Halsi, District-Lakhisarai. …….Respondents. ----------- 02. 22.05.2009 The petitioner claims to be the widow of late Alok Kumar. She was married with Alok Kumar in the year 2005. Alok Kumar had taken two life insurance policies from the LIC. Alok Kumar died in the year 2007. The LIC policies were taken by Alok Kumar prior to his marriage in which Alok Kumar had nominated his mother as a nominee to whom payment had to be made in event of his death. Petitioner has filed this writ application for issuance of a direction to the LIC not to pay her mother-in-law instead pay her as she is the widow and there being no other children. In my view, this can not be accepted for two 2 reasons. Firstly she is only one of the Class I heirs who survives the insured, the other is the mother of the insured. Second is that the insured had in his life time nominated his mother as a nominee. It is that nomination which is valid and binding on the LIC. LIC is bound to act as per nomination and nomination alone. By nominating a person to receive certain debt securities or payment, the nominee does not become the owner thereof. Nominee is merely a trustee for the true heirs and claimants. A payment to the nominee is a valid discharge of liability and beyond that the person who has accepted the nomination can not go. The only exception is an order from a Court of competent jurisdiction to the contrary either in the suit or in succession proceedings. In the present case, no conditions exempting LIC from acting on the nomination is pleaded. In such a situation, the prayer of the petitioner can not be granted. However, it is made clear that the mother-in-law of the petitioner and all such Class I heirs that survive would be equally entitled to the money in question upon proper adjudication in this matter. But so long as such an adjudication is not done or so long as parties themselves do not agree, LIC is bound to act on the 3 nomination and is bound to pay the claim as per nomination. With these observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Shageer (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)