C. R. No. 2394 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : C. R. No. 2394 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : April 30, 2009 Union of India and others .... Petitioners Vs. Mohinder Kaur .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Central Government Counsel for the applicant-petitioners. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : C. M. Nos. 10235-36-C-II of 2009 : For the reasons mentioned in the applications, delay of 97 days in re-filing the revision petition and also delay of 138 days in filing the revision petition is condoned. Main Case : Kulwant Singh – son of respondent-plaintiff Mohinder Kaur was serving in Army and died on 11.12.1996, while in active military service, leaving behind his widow Amarjit Kaur and mother Mohinder Kaur. All monetary benefits including ordinary family pension were paid to Amarjit Kaur – widow of the deceased. However, Amarjit Kaur re-married on 15.03.1998 and thereafter, her ordinary family pension was discontinued by the defendant-petitioners vide letter dated 09.07.1998. C. R. No. 2394 of 2009 (O&M) 2 The plaintiff-respondent filed suit seeking ordinary family pension w.e.f. 15.03.1998 i.e. the date of re-marriage of the widow of Kulwant Singh alleging that being mother of the deceased, the plaintiff is entitled to ordinary family pension. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar vide judgment and decree dated 03.11.2006 decreed the suit of plaintiff-respondent holding that she is entitled to ordinary family pension, as provided under the Army Pension Rules. The defendants preferred appeal against the said judgment and decree, but the appeal was filed after expiry of limitation period. The defendants moved application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc), Jalandhar vide order dated 29.04.2008 dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and consequently, dismissed the appeal as time barred. Feeling aggrieved, the defendants have preferred this revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the case file. This court has repeatedly held that parents are also part of family of deceased person, who was in military service and are, therefore, entitled to family pension. Reference may be made to judgment of this Court in case of Budh Singh vs. Union of India and others reported as 1992 (1) R. S. J. 801. The said judgment was also followed by this Court in the case of Gurdit Singh vs. Union of India and others (C. W. P. No.4433 of 1999 – decided on 09.11.2005). No judgment to the contrary has been cited by learned counsel for the petitioners. Moreover, after re- marriage of widow of Kulwant Singh, there was no legal heir left except the plaintiff-respondent and therefore, she is entitled to get ordinary family pension as nobody else is getting the said pension. Consequently, the plaintiff-respondent was rightly held entitled to ordinary family pension by the trial court. In this view of the matter, there is no merit in the appeal, C. R. No. 2394 of 2009 (O&M) 3 which was preferred by the defendants before the Lower Appellate Court. Consequently, I need not go into the question of condonation of delay in filing the said appeal. In view of the aforesaid, finding no merit in the instant revision petition, the same is hereby dismissed. April 30, 2009 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE