In Brief
A retired Army subedar married appellant No. 1 during his subsistence of marriage to another woman. He later divorced that wife in 1990 and continued living with appellant No. 1 for eleven years until his death in 2001. Appellants No. 2 and 3 are their children. When appellant No. 1 sought pension benefits, they were rejected on grounds that the original marriage was void. The Supreme Court held that long cohabitation following the dissolution of the prior marriage creates a presumption of valid marriage, which was not rebutted. The Court restored the trial court's judgment granting pension benefits to appellant No. 1 and benefits to appellants Nos. 2 and 3 until age 25.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.