RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS. versus GULAB SINGH AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] 3 S.C.R. 555 · Decided: 14-07-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
- . 
RAGHUBIR SINGH AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
GCLAB SINGH AND ORS. 
JCL Y 14, 1998 
[DR. A.S. ANAND, CJ! AND V.N. KHARE, J.] 
B 
Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Sections 14 (!) and 14 (2) 
Right to 
maintenance of Hindu widow- Will executed inf avour of grandson (daughter's 
son) Recital in the Will to the effect that testator and his wife (later becoming 
widow) would have full ownership and control of the property till their death C 
and thereafter property to be vested in the said grandson Suit filed by the 
reversioners to challenge the Will--.Compromise decree passed in the suit to 
the effect that property would remain in rightful possession of the widow and 
after her death. property would go to the deceased testator's grandson and 
his heirs and LRs· Widow retained the possession of the property till her D 
death in 1969- After her death. suit was again filed by reversioners for 
possession of the said property as owners on the ground that widow had no 
pre-exiMing right in the suit property and that the previous compromise 
decree had created only life interest in the widow-It was also alleged in the 
suit that in spite of Section 14 of the Act, widow never became absolute or 
full owner of the property--Held, widow had a pre-existing right in the E 
property which existed under Shastric Hindu law and later recognised by 
Hindu Woman's Right to property Act, 1937 and Hindu Married Woman's 
Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance Act, 1946- Will as widl as 
compromise decree clearly show that the widow had full ownership and 
possession of the property till her death after commencement of the Hindu F 
Succession Act· Further, even after assuming that she had only a limited 
estate, by force of Section 14(/) of the Act, widow's limited interest got 
automatically enlarged into an absolute right notwithstanding any restriction 
placed under the document or the instruments- Even compromise decree did 
not create any independent and new title in favour of widow for the first G 
time Hence, Section 14(2) had no application in the case-·Hindu Woman's 
Right to Property Act, 1937- -Hindu Married Women's Right to Separate 
Residence and Maintenance Act, 1946· Shastric Hindu Law. 
Deeds and Documents--Will---Interpretation of-Intention of the testator 
under the documents- -To be given fall effect to. 
H 
555 
556 
SlJPREMECOURlREPORTS 
[ 1998] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
A Will was executed by M in favour of his daughter's son (appellant 
No. I). The intention of the testator in the Will was to the effect that the 
rights and control over the property shall be vested in appellant No. I only 
after the demise of testator and his wife and that during the lifetime of either 
of them the right, control and ownership of the property would remain with 
B the survivors. Respondents, the reversmners, filed a suit for cancellation of 
the Will in which a compromise decree was passed by which widow of 
testator would remain in rightful possession of the property during her 
lifetime and therefore the property would go to testator's grandson (appellant 
No. I) and his other heirs and LRs. 
C 
After the death of the widow, a fresh suit was filed by revi:rsioners for 
the possession of the suit land on the ground that the widow had no pre- · 
existing right in the property as Hindu Woman's right to Property Act was 
not in force in Rewa State and that the compromise decree had created only 
life interest in her and therefore, in spite of Section 14 of the Hin~u 
Succession Act, the widow of testator did not become the full owner of the 
D suit property. Respondents /reversioners questioned the validity of the sale 
deeds in favour of the appellants/vendors on the ground that sales had not 
been made for any legal necessity and therefore, vendees acquired no valid 
title to the property ·purchased by them. Defence on the part of appellants was 
that the widow had an inherent right of maintenance out of the estate of 
E testator and that the compromise decree had conceded ownership of the land 
to her in recognition of that right; that the widow had become an absolute 
owner of that land by virtue of Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act 
and therefore, fully competent to transfer that land through sale deeds; that 
after the death of the widow, the land devolved on appellant No. I in accordance 
with the terms of the Will of testator. Trial court dismissed the suit. On 
F appeal, Addi. District Judge allowed the same and the respondents' suit was 

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