VELAMURI VENKATA SIVAPRASAD (DEAD) BY L.RS. versus KOTHURI VENKATESWARLU (DEAD) BY L.RS. AND ORS.

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 522 · Decided: 24-11-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. MAJMUDAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

. A 
VELAMURI VENKATA SIVAPRASAD (DEAD) BY L.RS. 
B 
I 
v. 
KOTHURI VENKATESWARLU (DEAD) BY L.RS. AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 24, 1999 
[S.B. MAJMUDAR, M. SRINIVASAN AND 
UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.] 
Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 
C 
Section 14(1)-Limited estate/interest of widow-Re-marriage of widow 
before coming into force of 1956 Act-Effect of-Held, re-marriage divesting 
widow as limited owner of estate of her deceased husband-Section 14(1) 
not applicable-No limited estate/interest subsisting on commencement of 
1956 Act which gets converted into full ownership-Hindu Widow's Re-
D marriage Act, 1856-section 2. 
Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act, 1949-Widow 
contending that re-marriage was not valid in view of 1949 Act and claiming 
benefit under 1956 Act-Prohibitory Statute-Interpretation of-Held, 
statutory prohibition cannot be treated in aid of conferment of right -
E Prohibitive statute of 1949 not applicable in the facts as it would lead to 
absurdity-Illegality and immoral conduct of widow established-Effect of- · 
Held, doctrine of sincerity and moral estoppel applicable-Widow cannot 
take advantage of her own immoral conduct and illegality-Void marriage-
Status of-Held, voidness of marriage not absolute nullity-Hindu Marriage 
Act, 1955-Sections 11, 16,& 23(l)(a). 
F 
R executed will bequeathing properties to his mother V and provided 
only some maintenance for his wife L It further provided that /,n,. case L adopted 
<'.!
a boy of the choice of his mother who was to remain under guardianship of 
'· 
his mother V until attainment of majority, and in that event would be entitled 
to certain properties specified in the will. After death of R. suits were filed by 
G both Land V which ended in compromise and affirmed the will as true and 
valid and recognised rights of both V and L in the properties. It further 
provided that L shall adopt a boy of the choice of V within 7 years from date 
of compromise and properties mentioned therein shall devolve upon the adopted 
son. When there was no adoption by L within specified period, V filed suit for 
H declaration that L was not entitled to adopt a boy under the compromise and 
522 
V. V. SJV A PRASAD v. KOT HU RI VENKATESW ARLU 
523 
" 
that she herself was entitled to adopt a boy and levelled specific allegations of A 
unchastity against L and contended that as a result L had lost all rights in 
the estate of her husband. Suit was dismissed by the trial court and first 
appellate court. 
Thereafter, suit was filed by V and her daughter for declaration of title 
B 
and possession of suit properties on the ground that L did not take adoption 
and also by reason of her re-marriage in 1953 she had lost all rights in the 
properties of her husband R. Trial Court held that L had remarried and 
adoption of defendant No. 8 by L was neither true nor valid, but dismissed the 
suit. Appeal filed by adopted son of V was allowed by Single Judge. In further 
appeal the Division Bench held that as a result of re-marriage of Lin 1953, c 
L could not make adoption to her first husband but allowed appeal on the 
ground that by virtue of Section 14(1) of the Hindu succession Act, 1956 pre-
existing right of L for maintenance from out of the property of her deceased 
husband matured into absolute right in properties. Hence, this appeal. 
The respondent contended that Section 4 (I) of the 1956 Act conferred D 
over-riding effect and therefore, Section 2 of the Hindu Widows Re-marriage 
Act, 1856 does not apply to extinguish rights of L; that re-marriage under 
1856 Act should be valid marriage and re-marriage of L was nullity by virtue 
of the Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act, 1949; and that 
social obligation to maintain wife could not be negated. 
E 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : I. The effect of re-marriage is available in the Hindu Widow's 
Re-marriage Act, 1856. Section 2 of the 1856 Act has taken away the right 
of widow in the event of re-marriage and the statute is very specific to the 
F 
effect that the widow on re-marriage would be deemed to be otherwise dead. 
The words" as if she had then died" are rather significant. The legislature 
intended therefore that in the event of a re-marriage, one loses the rights of 
even the limited interest in such property and after re-marriage the next heirs 
of her deceased's husband shall thereupon succeed to the same. It is thus a 
statutory recognition of a well reasoned pre-existing shastric law. The Act 

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