SADARAM SURYANARAYANA & ANR. versus KALLA SURYA KANTHAM & ANR.

Citation: [2010] 12 S.C.R. 808 · Decided: 22-10-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 808 
SADARAM SURYANARAYANA & ANR. 
V. 
KALLA SURYA KANTHAM & ANR. 
(Civil Appeal No. 2758 of 2004) 
OCTOBER 22, 2010 
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND T.S. THAKUR, JJ.] 
Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Will - Execution of -
Testator bequeathing property in absolute terms in favour of 
C her daughters - Latter part of bequest purporting to vest the 
same property in their female offspring - Interpretation of -
Held: It is clear from the Will that testatrix had made an 
unequivocal and absolute bequest in favour of her daughters 
- By the latter part all such property as remained available 
o in the hands of the legatees at the time of demise, were to 
devolve upon their female offspring - Latter part is redundant 
since it was repugnant to the clear intention of testatrix in 
making an absolute bequest in favour of her daughters -
Stipulation made in the second part did not in the least affect 
E the legatees being the absolute owners of the property 
bequeathed to them - Upon their demise the estate owned 
by them would devolve by the ordinary law of succession on 
their heirs and not in terms of the Will executed by testatrix -
Will. 
F 
The original owner bequeathed certain properties in 
favour of her daughters 'SA' and 'SR'. It was stipulated 
that after death of 'SA' and 'SR' the properties would 
devolve upon their female offsprings. 'SA' died intestate. 
The appellants, sons of 'SA', took possession of the 
G property bequeathed in favour of 'SA'. The respondents-
daughter of 'SA' and others filed a suit for declaration of 
title over the suit property and for recovery of possession 
in view of the stipulation contained in the Will. The trial 
H 
808 
SADARAM SURYANARAYANA & ANR. v. KALLA 
809 
SURYA KANTHAM & ANR. 
court dismissed the suit. The High Court set aside the 
A 
order passed by the trial court and decreed the suit. 
Therefore, the appellants filed the instant appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1.1 It is evident from a careful reading of 
B 
Sections 84, 85, 86 and 87 of the Indian Succession Act, 
1925 that while interpreting a Will, the courts would as far 
as possible place an interpretation that would avoid any 
part of a testament becoming redundant. The courts 
would also interpret a Will to give effect to the intention 
C 
of the testator as far as the same is possible. Each 
document has to be interpreted in the peculiar 
circumstances in which the same has been executed and 
keeping in view the language employed by the testator. 
That indeed is the requirement of Section 82 of the 
D 
Succession Act also inasmuch it provides that meaning 
of any clause in a Will must be collected from the entire 
instrument and all parts should be construed with 
reference to each other. [Para 16] [821-F-H; 822-A] 
1.2 It is evident from a careful reading of clause 6 of 
the Will that the same makes an unequivocal and absolute 
bequest in favour of daughters of testatrix. The use of 
words like "absolute rights of sale, gift, mortgage etc." 
employed by the testatrix make the intention of the 
testatrix abundantly clear. The testatrix desired that after 
the demise of her daughters the property vested in them 
would devolve upon their female heirs only. There is no 
dispute that the testatrix had in no uncertain terms made 
E 
F 
an absolute bequest in favour of her daughters. The 
submission that the absolute estate of the 'SA' ought to 
G 
be treated only as a life estate though attractive on first 
blush, does not stand closer scrutiny. It is said so 
because the ultimate purpose of interpretation of any 
document is to discover and give effect to the true 
H 
810 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2010] 12 S.C.R. 
A intention of the executor, in the instant case, the testatrix. 
The intention of the testatrix to make an absolute bequest 
in favour of her daughters is unequivocal. Secondly, the 
expression "after' demise of my daughters the retained 
and remaining properties shall devolve on their females 
B children only" does not stricto sensu amount to a 
bequest contrary to the one made earlier in favour of the 
daughters of the testatrix. The expression extracted does 
not detract from the absolute nature of the bequest in 
favour of the daughters. [Paras 6 and 17] [815-A-B; 822-
C C-D] 
1.3 All that the testatrix intended to achieve by the 
latter part of clause 6 was the devolution upon their 
female offsprings all such property as remained available 
in the hands of the legatees at the

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