BHAGAT RAM (DEAD) versus TEJA SINGH

Citation: [1999] 2 S.C.R. 358 · Decided: 31-03-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AJAY PRAKASH MISRA, U.C. BANERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
BHAGAT RAM (DEAD) 
v. 
TEJA SINGH 
MARCH 31, 1999 
[A.P. MISRA AND U.C. BANERJEE, JJ.] 
Hindu succession Act, 1956 : 
Sections 15 (1) and 15 (2) - Applicability of 
Hindu female-Property inherited by her from mother or father-Intestate 
succession to-Rule of succession-Held section 15(1) is not applicable-In 
such a case property devolv~s under section 15(2)-K, a widow, succeeding 
to property of her husband as owner-K had two daughters S & I-After K's 
Death her two daughters in possession of suit land-Thereafter succession 
D Act came into force-Death of Sin 1961-Mutation of entire land in favour 
of I-Land sold by 1 to appellant-Retraction of sale agreement by !-Suit 
for specific performance filed by appellant decreed by court-There after 
brother of S's pre-deceased husband, T, filed a suit for possession of half land 
which had fallen to the share of S-Claim based on section 15 (1) as heirs 
E of husband-Held not maintainable-Held after death of S-Property 
devolved not on the heirs of pre-deceased husband but on 1. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION-~ Civil Appeal No . 3663 of 
1984. 
F 
From the Judgment and Order dated 5 .10.83 of the Punjab & Haryana 
High Court in C. R.S.A. No. 1552of1971. 
V.C. Mahajan and Ms. S. Janani for the Appellant. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
G 
In this case, the respondent has not appeared inspite of service. 
Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. 
The short facts are that one Kehar Singh was the owner of the land 
H admeasuring 280 kanals and 18 marlas situated in Village Antowali (now in 
358 
-
BHAGAT RAM (DEAD) v. TEJA SINGH 
359 
Pakistan). He died prior to the partition. His widow Kirpo succeeded to his A 
estate as owner. She had two daughters Santi and Indro who came to India. 
Smt. Kirpo, widow of Kehar Singh was allotted suit land in lieu of the land 
left behind by her in Pakistan. In 1951 she died leaving behind two daughters 
who remained in possession of the suit land. Thereafter the Hindu Succession 
Act, 1956 came into force. Some time in 1961 one of the sister Santi died. In B 
1963, mutation on the entire land was made in favour of Indro, the other sister. 
On 2nd March, 1963, Indro entered into an agreement to sell of this land in 
dispute, with the present appellant. It seems that subsequently as Indro tried 
to retract from the said agreement to sell, the present appellant had to file a 
suit for specific performance which was decreed in appellant's favour. 
This led to the filing of the present suit by one Teja Singh who is the 
brother of Santi's pre-deceased husband. The suit was for possession of the 
half share of the suit land which had fallen to the share of Santi. Teja Singh 
based his claim on sub-section (1) of Section 15. He claimed to fall in the line 
c 
of succession under the second clause of this sub-section, namely, Section 
15(1) (b)-'heirs of the husband'. This position is contested by the appellant. D 
Appellant case is, sub-section (2) and not sub-section (1) of Section 15 will 
apply, on the facts and circumstances of this case. The trial court decreed the 
suit holding that Section 15(1) will apply. The appeal was also dismissed and 
the High Court also dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence the 
present appeal by special leave. 
The short question raised for our consideration is, whether on the facts 
and circumstances of this case, sub-section ( 1) or sub-section (2)" of section 
15 of Hindu Succession Act 1956 will apply. For ready reference, sgb-sections 
(I) and (2) of Section 15 are quoted hereunder :-
E 
" 15. General rules of succession in the case of female Hindus. -(1) The F 
property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to 
the rules set out in Section 16,-
(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any 
pre-deceased son or daughter) anj the husband ; 
(b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband ; 
(c) thirdly, upon the mother and father ; 
(d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father ; and 
(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother. 
G 
H 
360 
,A 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1999) 2 S.C.R. 
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),-
(a) 
any pro;Jerty inherited by a female Hindu from her father or 
mother shall devolve, in the abs.ence of any son or daughter of 
the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or 
daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (I) 
B 
in the order specified therein, bu

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.