KAMALA DEVI versus BACHO LAL GUPTA

Citation: [1957] 1 S.C.R. 452 · Decided: 29-01-1957 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHI RANJAN DAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

'957 
L. J. Leach and 
Company Ltd. 
v. 
Jardine Skinne1' 
and Co. 
Venkatarama 
Ayyar J. 
January, 29. 
452 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1957] 
rehearing to the trial court. The defendants will file 
their written statement to the amended claim and the 
suit will be tried and disposed of in accordance with 
law. 
There remains the question of costs. 
As the plaint-
iffs are getting an indulgence, they must pay the costs 
of the defendants both in the suit and in the appeal to 
the Bombay High Court. 
So far as costs of this appeal 
are 
concerned, 
as the defendants persisted in their 
contention that the plaintiffs were only acting as their 
agents, 
a contention which, if upheld, would have 
furnished a conclusive answer to the amended claim as 
well, we direct the parties to bear their own costs m 
this Court. 
KAMALA DEVI 
v. 
Appeal allowed. 
Case remanded. 
BACHO LAL GUPTA 
[S. R. DAs C. J., BHAGWATI and S. K. DAs JJ.] 
Hindu Law-Gift of immoveable property by widow-Daugh-
ter's marriage dotvry-Ante-nuptial pro1nise-Deed 
executed and 
registered after marriage-Validity-If binding on the reversioners-
Trnnsfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), s. 123-Hindu Succession 
Act, 1956 (XXX of 1956), s. 14. 
In 
fulfilment 
of 
an 
ante-nuptial 
promise 
made 
on 
the 
occasion of the settlement of the terms 
of 
marriage 
of 
her 
daughter, a 
Hindu 
widow, 
governed by the Benares School of 
Hindu Law, executed a registered deed of gift in respect of 4 
houses 
allotted 
to her share 
by a partition decree, in favour of 
her daughter as her marriage dowry about two years after the 
marriage. 
The partition decree gave her a right to the income, 
but no right to part with the corpus of the property to the 
prejudice of the reversioners. 
Her s.tep-sons brought a suit for a 
declaration that the deed r.f gift was void and inoperative beyond 
her lifetime and could 
not 
bind 
the 
reversioners. 
The 
trial 
court found that the gifted properties constituted a 
reasonable 
portion of the estate, but that the gift not having been made at 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
453 
the 
time of the marriage or on the occasion of the Gowna 
'i957 
(Dwiragaman) ceremony in accordance with the provisions of s. 
Kamala Deui 
123 of the Transfer of Property Act, was not binding on the rever-
v. 
sioners beyond the lifetime of the widow and decreed the suit. 
Bathu Lal G.pta 
The High Court found that the widow had made the ante-nuptial 
promise, but that the gift having been made about two years 
after the marriage or the Gowna ceremony, the provisions of the 
Transfer of Property Act relating to gifts stood in the way of 
considering the same as having been made on the occasion of the 
marriage but implemented later, and affirmed the decision of the 
trial court, although the gifted houses were found to constitute a 
reasonable portion of her husband's estate. 
The contentions in 
appeal on behalf of the widow and the daughter were (I) that 
the widow had the power in Hindu Law, as it stood before the 
enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, to execute the 
deed of gift in question and (2) that s. 14 of the said Act had the 
effect of making them full owners of the property in suit. 
Held, that the deed of gift in favour of the daughter was 
valid in law and binding on the reversioners and the appeal must 
succeed. 
Under the Benares School of Hindu Law, as it stood prior to 
the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as also 
under 
the partition decree, the . properties allotted to the widow con-
stituted her widow's estate as on inheritance and she. had no 
absolute right of disposal over them. 
Bhugwandeen Doobey v. Myna Baee, (1868) 11 M. I. A. 487, 
referred to. 
Debi Mangat Prasad Singh v. Mahadeo Prasad 'Singh, (1912) 
L. R. 39 I. A. 121, followed. 
In Hindu Law the marriage of a daughter is a pious act and 
confers direct spiritual benefit on the father and a widow has the 
power to make a gift of a reasonable portion of her husband's 
estate 
as 
marriage 
dowry 
to 
the 
daughter, 
even after the 
marriage, in fulfilment of an ante-nuptial promise, whether she 
makes the 'sankalpa' at the time of the marriage or not. 
Ganga Bisheshar v. Pirthi Pal, (1880) I. L. R. 2 All. 635, dis-
approved. 
Case-law reviewed. 
This power of the widow is one conferred on her by Hindu 
Law and is not affected by the provisions of s. 123 of the Trans-
fer of Property Act, though the gift to be legally effective must 
be made in the mann

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