LexBHAGAT RAM (D) BY LRS. versus TEJA SINGH (D) BY LRS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
BHAGAT RAM (D) BY LRS.
A
v.
TEJA SINGH (D) BY LRS.
NOVEMBER 6, 2001
[UMESH C. BANERJEE AND K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.]
B
Hindu Law:
Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Sections 15(1) and (2).
Female Hindu-Dying, intestate-Property of-Rules of succession-
C
Female Hindu inherited property from her nwther-On her death pmperty
mutated in the name of her sister-Such female Hindu's husband's brother.filed
a suit claiming that property devolved on him by virtue qf S.15(l)(b)-Trial
court decreed the suit, which was affirmed by High Court-Correctness qf-
Held: {fa .female Hindu inherits a property .from her father or mother, in the
D
absence qf a('y son or daughter qf the deceased inchuling the children of any
pre-deceased son or daughte1; it would devolve upon the heirs qf her father
under S.15(2)(a) and not under S.JS(l)(b)-Therefore, sister, being the only
legal heir qf the father, the pmperty rightly mutated in her name-Hence, High
Court's order set aside.
Words and Phrases:
"Any property inherited from a female Hindu"-Meaning of-Jn the
context of S.15(2)(a) and (b) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
The suit property was inherited equally hy S and I, the daughters of
the original owner. After the death of S her share of the property was
mutated in the name of her surviving sister I. The appellant who had
entered into an agreement with I, after the death ot S, filed a snit for
specific' performance, which was decreed in his favour.
The respondent, who was the brother of the pre-deceased husband of
S, filed a snit alleging that, on the death of S her share of the suit property
devolved on him by virtue of Section IS(l)(b) of the Hindu Succession Act,
1956. The trial court decreed the suit, which was affirmed by the first
143
E
F
G
H
144
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R.
A
appellate court. The appellant's second appeal was dismissed by the High
Court. Hence this appeal.
B
c
D
E
On behalf of the respondent it was contended that when S acquired
the property from her mother she had only a limited right over this
property and by virtue of S.14(1) of the Act she became full owner of her
property and, therefore, her property would he inherited by her legal
heirs as per Section 15(l)(b) of the Act; and the words "any property"
inherited by a female Hindu" occurring in Section 15(2)(a) of the Act are
to be construed as property inherited by a female Hindu after the com-
mencement of the Act.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
•
HELD : 1. Admittedly, S inherited the property in question from her
mother. If the property held by a female was inherited from her father or
mother, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased, including
the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter, it would only devolve
upon the heirs of the father and, in this case, her sister I was the only legal
heir of her father. It is not necessary that such inheritance should have
been after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The
intent of the Legislature is clear that the property, if originally belonged to
the parents of the deceased female, should go to the legal heirs of the
father. So also under section 15(2)(b), the property inherited by a female
Hindu from her husband or her father-in-law, shall also under similar
circumstances, devolve upon the heirs of the husband. It is the source from
which the property was inherited by the female, which is more important
F
for the purpose of devolution of her property. The fact that a female
Hindu originally had a limited right and later, acquired the full right, in
any way, would not alter the rules of succession given in Section 15(2) of
the Act. [149-D-E-F-G]
G
Bajya v. Smt. Gopikabai, AIR (1978) SC 793, relied on.
State ~f Punjab v. Ba/want Singh and Chand Singh v. Ba/want Singh,
AIR (1991) SC 2301 and Bhagat Ram (Dead) v. Teja Singh, .[1999] 4 SCC
86, referred to.
H
2. Even if the female Hindu who is having a limited ownership
BHAGAT RAM v. TEJA SINGH [BALAKRISHNAN, J.]
145
becomes full owner by virtue of Section 14(1) of the Act, the rules, of
A
succession given under Section 15(2) can be applied. [150-D]
Smt. Amar Kaur v. Smr. Raman Kumari, AIR (1985) P & H 86, over-
ruled.
3. The source from which the female Hindu inherits the property is
always important and that would govern the situation. Otherwise persons
who are not even remotely related to the person who originally held the
property would acquExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.