SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(SC) 127

C.A.VAIDIALINGAM, S.M.SIKRI, V.BHARGAVA
Fateh Bibi – Appellant
Versus
Charan Dass – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :K.M. Bhatti, Advocate

Judgment

VAIDIALINGAM, J.: The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, filed by the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, on certificate, is whether on a true construction of the Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act, 1929 (Act II of 1929) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), it applies only to the case of a Hindu male dying intestate on or after February 21, 1929 (when the Act came into force) or whether it applies in the case of a Hindu male dying intestate before the Act came into operation and succeeded by a female heir who died after that date.

2. The following pedigree will be useful in appreciating the relationship of the parties as well as the basis of the claim made regarding the title to the properties by the parties.

3. The respondent-plaintiff instituted Suit No. 41 of 1955 in the Subordinate Judge s Court, Jagraon, against the original defendant for recovery of possession of the suit properties. According to the plaintiff, Kirpa Ram was the last owner of the properties. Even during his lifetime his only son Charanji Lal had died. On the death of Kirpa Ram, his widow Bishan Devi became the owner of the properties and was in possession of























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top