SMT. DIPO versus WASSAN SINGH & OTHERS

Citation: [1983] 3 S.C.R. 20 · Decided: 05-05-1983 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.A. DESAI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
A 
B 
·c 
D 
E 
20 
SMT. DIPO 
v. 
WASSAN SINGH & OTHERS 
May 5, !983 
(D. A .. DESAI AND 0. CHINNAPPA, REDDY J}.] 
_ Hindu Law-Property inherited fro1n paternal ancestors is 'ancestral pro, 
perty' ouly tis regards as male issue of propositus-As regards other relations it 
is his abso/UJe property. 
:Rules of procedure-Meant to advance cause of juslice; not to _short circuit; 
iecision on merits. 
Th~ appellant filed a suit to recover possession of properties belonging 
to her deceased brother Bua Singh claiming to be his nearest heir 
The suit 
was contested by the sons of Bua Singh's paternal uncle. 
JVIost of the suit 
properties were ancestral, while only a few of them were non-ancestral. Pro· 
ceeding on the basis that according to t11e custom, the sister was .exc1uded by 
the collaterals in the case of ancestral property, the trial court held that the 
appellant was entitled to succeed only to· the non-ancestral property_ of Bua. 
Singh.· While the first appeal was rejected· on the ground that she did not 
present the appeal in person as required by 0.33, r. 3, the second appeal was 
rejected on the ground that a copy of the trial court judgment was filed after 
the _expiry of the period of limitation. 
Allowing the appeal, 
J-lELD : 1. Property inherited from paternal ancestors is 'ancestral 
property' as regards the male issue of the propositus, but it is his absolute 
F 
property and not ancestral property as regards other relations. [23 A] 
G 
H 
Mulla: Principles of Hindu law, 15th ed., pp. 289 and 291 relied on. 
IO the instant case, no doubt, the prOperties· which have been found by 
the lower courts to be 'ancestral properties' in the hands ·or Bua Singh are 
properties which originally belOnged to Bua Singh's ancestors. But Bua Singh 
was the last male holder of the property and he had no mal~ issue. There ·was 
no surviving:membe(of a joint family, be it a descendent -or otherwise, who 
could take the property by survivorship. The respondents were collaterals of 
Bua Singh and as regards them the property was nqt 'ancestrel property' and 
hence the appellant was the Preferential heir. The appellant was, therefore, 
entitled to a decree in respect of all ·the plaint properties. 
2. Rules of procedure are meant to advance the cause of justice and not 
tQ shQr~·circuit.decision or merits. The lower Col,lrts w~re i.n error in dismissing 
• 
., 
·~ 
.... 
DIPO v. WASSAN SINGH (Chinnappa Reddy, J.) 
2i 
the appeals preferred by the appellant. When the District Judge had admitted 
the first appeal there was no point in dismissing it thereafter on the ground 
A 
that the memorandum of appeal had not been presented by the party herself. 
The High Court should havC condoned the delay in filing a copy of the_trial 
collrt's judgment and the second appeal should have been disposed of on 
merits. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 
1970. 
Civil Appeal No. 1938 of 
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
the 22nd September, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court 
B 
in R.S.A. No. 1021 of 1964. 
C 
N. K. Aggarwal for the Appellant. 
S. L. Aneja for the Respondent. 
· The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
• 
CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. Smt. Dipo, plaintiff in Suit No. 8of1692 
in the Court of the Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Amritsar is .the 
appellant in this appeal by special leave. She sued to recover posses-
sion of the properties which belonged to her brother, Bua Singh, who 
died in 1952. She claimed to be the nearest heir of Bua Singh. The 
suit was filed in forma pauperis. The suit was contested by the defen-
dants who are. the som of Ganda Singh, paternal uncle of Bua Singh . 
The grounds of contest were that Smt. Dipo ":as not the sister of Bua 
Singh and that even if she was the sister, the defendants were 
preferential heirs according to custom, as the whole of the land was 
ancestral in the hands of Bua Singh. The learned Subordinate Judge 
held that the plaintiff, Smt. Dipo was the sister of Bua Singh. He. 
found that most of the suit properties were ancestral properties, in 
the hands of Bua Singh, while a few were not ancestral. Proceeding 
on the basis that according to the custom, the sister was excluded by 
collaterals in the case of ancestral property while she was entitled to 
succeed to non-ancestral property, the learned Subordinate Judge 
granted .a decree in favour of the plaintiff for a 2959/34836 share of 
the plaint Alaf schedule lands and.a 13;80th share of the iand des

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