MUTHUSWAMI NADAR AND ORS. versus RAMAKRISHNAN NADAR AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 12 · Decided: 30-11-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: FAIZAN UDDIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MUTHUSWAMI NADAR AND ORS. 
v. 
RAMAKRISHNAN NADAR AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 30, 1995 
B 
[FAIZAN UDDIN AND SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.] 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1956: Section 26. 
Unmarried so1t-Death-l'rope1ty-Devolution 011 mother-Death of 
C mother-Devolution of property 011 her daughters-Sale deed executed by 
daughters-Held valid. 
A partition suit filed by the appellants on the basis of two sale deeds 
executed in their favour by R and M was contested by the respondents on 
the ground that the sale deeds were invalid. The Trial Court held that sale 
D effected by both the vendors was valid as they had inherited an interest in 
land from their mother, K. The first Appellate Court held that vendors' 
mother, who was a christian, could not have succeeded to the property of 
her son U who died as a Hindu. The High Court aflirmed the judgment of 
the First Appellate Court. Hence this appeal. 
E 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : The First Appellate Court had wrongly assumed that 
vendor's mother K had converted into christianity. It is an admitted fact 
that she was Hindu till she died in the year 1957. On the death of her 
F 
unmarried son U his share devolved on her. After her death succession to 
her property will be governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which 
came into force. That being so, her two daughters will be entitled to the . 
property left by their mother because a convert's descendants only are 
disqualified under Section 20. Therefore, sales effected by Rand M would 
G be valid. [13-F-H, 14-A] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1607 of 
1981. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.12.86 of the Madro' High 
H Court in C.A. No. 1977 of 1977. 
12 
• 
.. 
MUTIIUSWAMI NADAR v. RAMAKR!SHNAN NADAR 
13 
K. V. Mohan for the Appellants. 
V. Balachandran, K.R. Choudhary, (NP) and S. Arvind for the 
Respondents. 
The following O_rder of the Court was delivered : 
This appeal at the instance of the plaintiffs has been directed against 
the judgment dated 16th December, 1986 passed by the High Court of 
Madras in Second Appeal No. 1977 of 1977, affirming the judgment of the 
first Appellate Court dated 9.9.1977 whereby the judgment and degree 
passed by the Trial Court were reversed. The plaintiffs-appellants had 
instituted the suit for partition of the suit land on the basis of the three 
Sale Deeds one of which is said to have been executed by Inkupillai and 
Muthupillai - sons of Perumal in respect of their shares, in favour of the 
third appellant. The two other Sale Deeds were executed by Rosammal 
A 
B 
c 
and Mariammal, in favour of the first appellant and. the second appellant D 
respectively. The suit was resisted by the respondent on the ground that 
Rosammal and Mariammal did not inherit any interest in the land and, 
· 'f' 
therefore, Sale Deeds executed by them were invalid. The Trial Court on 
evaluation of the evidence took the view that the vendors of the plaintiffs 
had inherited an interest in the land in question and. therefore, the sales 
E 
effected by them were valid. These findings were reversed by the first 
Appellate Court on the assumption that Kochammal - the mother of 
Rosammal and Mariammal was a Christian and, therefore, she could not 
succeed to the property of Kumaraswami, her sons, who died as a Hindu. 
But on perusal of the pleadings of the parties, we find that the learned 
First Appellate Court had wrongly assumed that Kochammal - the mother 
of Rosammal and Mariammal had converted into Christianity. On the 
contrary, we find that it is an admitted fact that she was a Hindu till she 
died in the year 1957. 
F 
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, on the death of G 
Kumaraswami on (23.7.1864) 
share of Kumaraswami devolved on his 
mother Kochammal, according to Mitakshara Law because, Kumaraswami 
died unmarried. After the death of Kochammal in the year 1957 succession 
to her property will be governed by the Hindu Succesion Act which came 
into force in 1854 and that being so, her two daughters will be entitled to H 
14 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A 
the property left by their mother because a. convert descendants only are 
disqualified under Section 20 of the Hindu Succession Act. In these facts 
and circumstances, sales effected by Rosammal ad Mariammal would be 
valid. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed. The judg-
ment and decree passed by the first Appellate Court and the High Court 
B are set aside and that of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.