State Of Pb vs Leelo Devi
2024 Latest Caselaw 9259 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

State Of Pb vs Leelo Devi on 30 April, 2024

Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi

Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058851



                                          Neutral Citation No.2024:PHHC:058851

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH
201
                                          RSA-1549-1999 (O&M)
                                          Decided on :30.04.2024

STATE OF PUNJAB                                             . .Appellant
                                        Versus
LEELO DEVI                                                  . . . Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

PRESENT: Mr. Rohit Ahuja, DAG, Punjab.

       Ms. Ramneeq Kaur, Advocate for the respondent.
       ****
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral)

1. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the judgment and

decree of the lower Appellate Court is contrary to the judgment passed of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in CA No. 4254 of 1999, titled as,

State of Punjab and another v. Devinder Kaur, decided on 03.08.1999,

wherein it has already been recorded that prior to the year 1996 as per the

Family Pension Scheme of 1964, the parents of the deceased employee were

not entitled for the benefit of family pension and in the present appeal, the

death of son of the respondent-plaintiff is prior to the year 1996 and hence,

the mother of the deceased employee could have been granted the benefit of

family pension.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff on the other hand

submits that the present regular second appeal was filed 25 years ago and as

of now, she is not in touch with the respondent and does not know as to

whether the respondent-plaintiff is alive to claim the benefit extended by the

said judgment and decree impugned in the present regular second appeal or

not.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as the judgment

of the lower Appellate Court was stayed vide order dated 24.09.1999 passed

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:058851

RSA-1549-1999 (O&M) 2- 2024:PHHC:058851 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and no benefit has been extended to

the respondent-plaintiff under the said judgment so far, hence, the present

regular second appeal may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any

further with liberty to revive the same in case the respondent-plaintiff is alive

and initiates any action to execute the impugned judgment and decree.

4. The present appeal is disposed of having been not pressed any

further with liberty as prayed for.

5. It is directed that without there being any specific order from

this Court, the executing Court will not execute the judgment of the lower

Appellate Court which has been stayed vide order dated 24.09.1999 passed

by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Ordered accordingly.

7. Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed

of.

                                                  (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
                                                          JUDGE
30.04.2024
Riya

Whether speaking/reasoned:        Yes/No
Whether Reportable:                Yes/No




                                    2 of 2