LAKHAN vs M.C. ROHTAK

SARITA RANI 2026.07.14 17:46 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order RSA No.1905 of 2025 (O&M) 2026:PHHC: 095546 submied any applicaon claiming family pension nor furnished the documents required under the Scheme. The suit was also pleaded to be hopelessly barred by limitaon. 4. Upon appreciaon of the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Trial Court held that the plainff had aained majority in June, 2008 and had instuted the suit only in November, 2020 without ever approaching the competent authority for release of family pension. It was further held that the plainff had failed to establish the foundaonal facts regarding his eligibility under the applicable Family Pension Scheme. Consequently, the suit was dismissed. The findings have been affirmed by the learned First Appellate Court. 5. Assailing the concurrent findings, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that both the Courts below have commied a substanal error of law in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitaon. According to him, family pension is a recurring benefit and every month's non-payment gives rise to a fresh cause of acon. It is thus argued that the suit could not have been dis