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

2016 Supreme(SC) 27

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Kurian Joseph, R.F. Nariman, JJ.
L. GOWRAMMA (D) BY LR. – APPELLANT
VERSUS
SUNANDA (D) BY LRS. & ANR. – RESPONDENTS
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 174-175 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) Nos.24809-24810 of 2008)
Decided On : 12-01-2016

IMPORTANT POINT
Property taken by inheritance by a female from her father is not included in Stridhan.

Headnote:Hindu Law Women’s Rights Act, 1933 (Mysore Act No. X of 1933) – Sections 8(1)(d) and 10(1)(g) – Order of succession – Section 8(1)(d) can have no application to a case where joint family property passes to a single coparcener not by survivorship but by partition – Succession to a Hindu male dying intestate will vest only in widow under Section 4(1)(ii) to exclusion of daughters who are mentioned in subsequent Clause (iii) – Under Section 10(1)(g) it is only property taken by inheritance by a female from her husband that is included in Stridhan – This would not include unmarried daughters as property taken by inheritance by a female from her father is not included.(Paras 17, 19 and 20)

       (1997) 10 SCC 684 ; [1968] 1 SCR 124 – Relied. ILR 2014 Karnataka 1335 – Approved.

       Facts of Case:

       Instant appeals raise question on true construction of some of provisions of Hindu Law Women’s Rights Act, 1933 (Mysore Act No. X of 1933). Widow has executed a will on 9.5.1990 bequeathing her share in joint family property in favour of only one of three daughters namely the third defendant. 4th defendant has been joined in suit inasmuch as first defendant widow had sold one of scheduled items of suit property namely item No.3 to the said 4th defendant during the pendency of suit.

       Findings of Court:

       There is also another way of looking at the issue raised in present appeals. A partition of joint family property among brothers is expressly mentioned in Section 8(1)(b). Therefore, upon partition of joint family property between Thimmappa and his older brother, it is only their mother, their unmarried sisters and widows and unmarried daughters of their pre-deceased undivided brothers who have left no male issue who get a share under the Section. Unlike sub-section (a), unmarried daughters of Thimmappa do not get any share at the partition between Thimmappa and his brother.

       Result : Appeals allowed. Judgments passed by Courts below set aside.

JUDGMENT

R.F. Nariman, J.

1. Delay condoned in filing the special leave petitions.

2. Leave granted.

3. These appeals raise an interesting question on the true construction of some of the provisions of the Hindu Law Women’s Rights Act, 1933 (Mysore Act No.X of 1933). One Venkatsubbaiah had two sons Mahabalaiah and Thimmappa. After the death of Venkatsubbaiah, the two sons and the wife of Mahabalaiah constituted a joint Hindu family. Mahabalaiah being the elder brother was the Karta of the said family. In the year 1940-1941, Mahabalaiah and Thimmappa partitioned and divided their joint family properties and got possession of their respective shares. Thimmappa died on 9.10.1952, leaving behind him his widow one Gowramma and three daughters. The widow has executed a will on 9.5.1990 bequeathing her share in the joint family property in favour of only one of the three daughters namely the third defendant. The 4th defendant has been joined in the suit inasmuch as the first defendant widow had sold one of the scheduled items of the suit property namely item No.3 to the said 4th defendant during the pendency of the suit.

4. One of the said daughters namely Sunanda filed a suit against defendant No.1 – her mother, defendant Nos. 2 and 3 – her sisters, and defendant No.4 – the purchaser, being O.S. No.46 of 1994. After setting out the relevant facts, the Civil Judge, Senior Division by judgment dated 28.3.2005 framed as many as 12 issues and ultimately decided on application of Section 10(2)(g) of the 1933 Act that the plaintiff would be entitled to a 1/4th share in the scheduled properties and the suit was decreed accordingly.

5. In a first appeal filed by defendant No.1, the first Appellate Court agreed with the conclusions both on facts as well as law with the trial court. Accordingly, the first appeal was dismissed on 5.8.2005.

6. Thereafter, a review petition was filed and by the judgment dated 24.11.2007, the review was dismissed but this time adverting to Section 8(1)(d) of the 1933 Act and decreeing the suit with reference to the said Section. The review also was accordingly dismissed.

7. Shri R.S. Hegde, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has urged before us that the applicable Section of the 1933 Act is Section 4, and not Sections 8 and 10, and accordingly the succession of a Hindu male dying intestate vests property only in the widow to the exclusion of the daughters and hence the plaintiff’s suit should have been dismissed on this ground.

8. On the other hand, Shri S.N. Bhat, learned counsel, invited our attention to Section 8(1)(d) of the Act and according to him since joint family property passed to Thimmappa who was a single coparcener by survivorship, on partition in 19401941, all the classes of females mentioned in Section 8 would be entitled to a share in the said property which would include not only his widow but also his unmarried daughters.

9. For a proper appreciation of the controversy at hand, we set out the relevant Sections of the Hindu Law Women’s Rights Act, 1933 (Mysore Act No.X of 1933).

“Part I

INHERITANCE

4. Order of succession:-

(1) The succession to a Hindu male dying intestate shall, in the first place, vest in the members of the family of the propositus mentioned below, and in the following order:-

i) the male issue to the third generation ;

ii) the widow ;

iii) daughters ;

iv) daughter’s sons

XXX XXX XXX

8. Certain females entitled to shares at partition-

(1) (a) At a partition of joint family property between a person and his son or sons, his mother, his unmarried daughters and the widows and unmarried daughters of his predeceased undivided sons and brothers who have left no male issue shall be entitled to share with them.

(b) At a partition of joint family property among brothers, their mother, their unmarried sisters and the widows and unmarried daughters of their predeceased undivided brothers who have left no male issue shall be entitled to share with them.

(c) Sub-sections (a































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top