LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Rama Krishna   23 April 2022

married women left and returned 30 years back

a married women left her husband 30 years ago without giving divorce and keep quit and return back after 30 years.
husband married another women after left his wife.
now husband died the 1st wife arguinng that i didn't give divorce hence I am the legitimate wife to get death benefits though her husband mentioned 2nd wife as his nominee.
is first wife entitled to get death benefits?
please give suggessions and some case lawas


 21 Replies

Shashi Dhara   23 April 2022

As she is not divorced she is entitled for her husband's property and benifits ,try amicably with her.

1 Like

SHIRISH PAWAR, 7738990900 (Advocate)     23 April 2022


Yes amicable settlement is the only solution for 2nd wife as first wife was not divorced. 

1 Like

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     23 April 2022

If a spouse is abscondng for 7 years or more with whereabouts not known the deserted apouse can apply to the court  to nullifying the first marriage and marry again if he or she so wishes. If the husband had not followed all the necessary procedure, a court of law will have to decide taking into account all the circumstances of the case brought before it.  The first wife or the second wife can go to court. No one can give a categorical opinion purely based on what are stated here.

1 Like

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (advocate)     23 April 2022

Since first wife was not divorced and their marriage is still subsists so first wife has only right to get her deceased husband's property and death benefits.
1 Like

Dr J C Vashista (Advocate)     24 April 2022

I fully agree with expert advise of Mr. Bhatesh Goyal.

During subsistance of marriage if the Hindu husband re-married it is illegal and invalid and the wife (first) has the right to have her husband's estate / benefits.

What is your problem / dispute / concern / locus standi to the facts posted ?

1 Like

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     24 April 2022

Full facts of the case are not presented here.. This is a fit case for the second wife to go to court. One has to do research to find out whether there are any case laws. There could be case laws.

Rama Krishna   24 April 2022

Dr. vasista sir,
deceased husband taken a insurance policy and mentioned his second wife as nominee
he mentioned nominee relation was wife.
1st wife arguing here wife was her though he mentioned 2nd wife name as nominee

Dr J C Vashista (Advocate)     24 April 2022

Although LIC is a PSU where service i.e., CCS CCA rules are inapplicable and any one can be nominated by the insured and the insurance corporation cannot have objection, even than (first) wife of the deceased insured can raise  the objection, where there are bleek chances of success. 

Shashi Dhara   25 April 2022

Nominee is not  legal successor as per law.if nominee is successor then they get their legitimate share ,if husband has made any will to  2nd wife then she has to  obtain p &sc.

1 Like

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     25 April 2022

As per the amended Insurance Act of 2015, a nominee for an Insurance policy is termed as a "beneficial nominee". A beneficial nominee gets the amount to the exclusion of any legal heirs and other claimants. Thus the second wife will get the amount provided that she contests it through a lawyer who has knowledge of the law.

Dr J C Vashista (Advocate)     26 April 2022

Despite the fact a "beneficial nominee" can draw the amount from LIC yet s/he is not eligible to retain / keep it as s/he is just custodian of the amount and shall have to pass on to legal representative of the deceased, as opined and advised by expert Shashi Dhara.

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     26 April 2022

Please read the new Insurance Act 2015. Nominee is no more a custodian or trustee. Old judgments w.r.t. insurance nominee not absolute owner is no more valid.

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     27 April 2022

"Nominee is not absolute owner of the property."

There is no law or section in law that states this. If this is stated in any law I challenge any lawyer to show that to me.

"Nominee not an absolute owner" is a creation of judgments beginning with the Insurance Act, 1938. Subsequent judgments followed this. Even when occasionally a judgment restored the right to the nominee, the judges will promptly pronounced it "per curium". A High Court or Supreme Court judgment becomes case law for all subsequent cases. All further judgments in similar cases have to follow it. But parliament can reverse such judgments. That has what happened in the insurance law. Modi Government in 2015 passed the new insurance law reversing all previous nominee judgments.

shrikant v. sathe (retired)     27 April 2022

It is the fault of the husbund and the woman who was living with him.They both are at the fault.Hence the first wife is a legitimate wife of the deceased, and should get all the property of her husband.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query