Latest JudgementHindu Marriage Act, 1955

Vidya Devi v. Union of India & Others, 2026

The Court applied personal law principles to determine entitlement under service pension rules.

Delhi High Court·27 February 2026
Vidya Devi v. Union of India & Others, 2026
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Share:

Judgement Details

Court

Delhi High Court

Date of Decision

27 February 2026

Judges

Justice V. Kameswar Rao & Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

Citation

Acts / Provisions

Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Facts of the Case

  • Late Sepoy Udey Singh had a legally wedded first wife when he married the petitioner, Vidya Devi.

  • No divorce was obtained during the lifetime of Udey Singh.

  • Udey Singh died in 2011 while his first wife was still alive.

  • The first wife died later in 2012.

  • The petitioner claimed family pension under the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961.

  • Her claim was rejected by the Armed Forces Tribunal.

  • The petitioner challenged the Tribunal’s decision before the High Court.

  • She argued that after the death of the first wife, she should be treated as the lawful widow.

  • She also relied upon an Office Memorandum issued under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021.

Issues

  1. Whether a woman whose marriage was solemnised during the subsistence of her husband’s first marriage is entitled to family pension?

  2. Whether the subsequent death of the first legally wedded wife can validate a marriage which was void at its inception?

  3. Whether Office Memoranda under CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 can confer pensionary rights contrary to the Army Pension Regulations?

Held

  • The petitioner’s marriage was a void marriage.

  • The petitioner was not entitled to family pension.

  • The order of the Armed Forces Tribunal was upheld.

  • The petition was dismissed.

Analysis

  • The Court applied personal law principles to determine entitlement under service pension rules.

  • It reinforced that a void marriage cannot become valid due to later events such as death of the first spouse.

  • The decision ensures that family pension is restricted to legally recognised spouses.

  • The judgment maintains harmony between family law and service law.

  • It prevents misuse of pensionary benefits through equitable arguments.