Madras HC Upholds Dismissal Of Woman’s Suit Claiming To Be Late Chithuraj’s Wife, Citing Other Wife’s Service Records

The appellant claimed to be the wife of the deceased Chithuraj, relying on a passbook and ration card.

The second defendant also claimed to be his wife and produced his service records, in which she was recorded as his legal heir, along with a ration card.

The trial court dismissed the suit, finding the second defendant to be the deceased’s wife and defendants 3 to 5 to be his children; the first appellate court affirmed that decree.

The appellant brought this second appeal against the concurrent decisions

The appeal was brought under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure

The judgment does not identify any further statutory provision, precedent, or express legal test.

It proceeds on the basis that the concurrent findings should not be disturbed where the Court finds no reason to interfere

The Court contrasted the appellant’s passbook and ration card with the second defendant’s service records identifying her as the deceased’s legal heir, together with her ration card.

It concluded that the appellant had not produced relevant documentary evidence sufficient to establish her claim, while the evidence relied on by the second defendant supported the findings that she was the deceased’s wife and defendants 3 to 5 were his children.

On that basis, the Court found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings

No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed