MUKATLAL versus KAILASH CHAND (D) THROUGH LRS. AND ORS.

Citation: [2024] 6 S.C.R. 298 · Decided: 16-05-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 298 : 2024 INSC 428
Mukatlal
v.
Kailash Chand (D) Through Lrs. and Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 6460 of 2024)
16 May 2024 
[B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to the right of the legal heir of Hindu widow to enforce 
her right of succession in the unpartitioned Joint Hindu Family 
property by virtue of s. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Headnotes
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s.14(1) – Property of a female 
Hindu to be her absolute property – Right of the legal heir 
of Hindu widow to enforce her right of succession in the 
unpartitioned joint hindu family property by virtue of s.14(1), 
when neither the widow nor her legal heir in possession of 
the suit land:
Held: For establishing full ownership on the undivided joint family 
estate u/s. 14(1), the Hindu female must not only be possessed 
of the property but she must have acquired the property and such 
acquisition must be either by way of inheritance or devise, or at 
a partition or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance 
or by gift or be her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by 
prescription – On going through the pleadings in the Revenue 
suit for partition filed by legal heir, it is clear that that the widow 
or the legal heir himself were never in possession of the suit 
property – As a matter of fact, the suit was filed by pleading that 
the suit property was a joint Hindu family property and appellant-
beneficiary of the unpartitioned estate by way of Will, had consented 
to give half share of the suit property to the legal heir on his 
demand – This assertion was denied by appellant – Widow was 
never in possession of the suit property because the civil suit 
was filed by her claiming the relief of title as well as possession 
and the same was dismissed and she was held only entitled to 
receive maintenance from the undivided estate – This finding of 
the civil Court was never challenged – Since, widow was never 
in possession of the suit property, as a necessary corollary the 
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 
299
Mukatlal v. Kailash Chand (D) Through Lrs. and Ors.
Revenue suit for partition claiming absolute ownership u/s. 14(1) 
could not be maintained by her adopted son, plaintiff by virtue 
of inheritance – Thus, the impugned judgments restoring the 
judgment and decree of the Revenue Court that the plaintiff being 
the sole legal heir of the widow has coparcenary rights over the 
lands belonging to widow’s husband, cannot be sustained and 
are set aside. [Paras 17, 24-28]
Case Law Cited
M. Sivadasan (Dead) through Lrs. and Others v. A. 
Soudamini (Dead) through Lrs. and Others (2023) SCC 
OnLine SC 1078 – relied on.
Ram Vishal(dead) by LRs. And Others v. Jagannath 
and Another (2004) 9 SCC 302; Vasant and Anr. v. 
Dattu & Ors. (1987) 1 SCC 160; Munni Devi alias Nathi 
Devi (Dead) Thr LRs & Ors. v. Rajendra alias Lallu Lal 
(Dead) Thr LRs & Ors. [2022] 3 SCR 876 : (2022) SCC 
OnLine SC 643 – referred to.
List of Acts
Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
List of Keywords
Right of succession in the unpartitioned joint hindu family property; 
Full ownership; Undivided joint family estate; Inheritance or devise; 
In lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance; Suit for partition; 
Absolute ownership.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6460 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 02.11.2017 of the High Court 
of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur in DBSAW No. 1029 of 2006
Appearances for Parties
Puneet Jain, Mrs. Christi Jain, Mann Arora, Ms. Akriti Sharma, Ms. 
Lisha, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Advs. for the Appellant.
Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv., Atul Jha, Vinayak Sharma, 
Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Advs. for the Respondents.
300
[2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Mehta, J.
1.	
Leave granted.
2.	
The instant appeal by special leave challenges the final judgment and 
order dated 2nd November, 2017 passed by learned Division Bench 
of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1029 
of 2006 whereby the appeal preferred by the appellant questioning 
the legality and validity of the judgment dated 21st July, 2006 passed 
by learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B. Civil 
Writ Petition No. 1587 of 1993 was dismissed. 
3.	
For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to by their 
rank in the Revenue Court.
4.	
In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.