ORDER :

1. Learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the judgment of this Court in 1966 (2) SCR 626 Eramma v. Verrupanna & Ors.; 2007(4) SCC 163 - Chinthamani Ammal v. Nandagopal Gounder and Anr.; 1977(3) SCC 99, Tulasamma and Others v. Sesha Reddy (Dead) by Lrs. and 1967 (3) SCR 454, Mangal Singh & Ors. v. Shrimati Rattno & Anr. to contend that Jaichha Kuwar did not become full owner of property as per section 14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

2. We have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the counsel for the parties.

3. However in view of the decision of Tulasamma, the widow, namely, Jaichha Kuwar would have to be conferred right of ownership as she was holding the property for the purpose of maintenance and was also in possession of the same, though, her husband died much before 1937.

4. In Bai Vajia (Dead) by Lrs. v. Thakorbhai Chelabhai & Ors., AIR 1979 SC 993 relying on Tulsamma (supra), this court observed :

3. At the outset it was pointed out by Mr. I.N. Shroff, under Counsel for the appellant, that Naraini Devi's case (supra) has since been over-ruled by the decision of this Court in V. Tulasamma and Ors. v. V. Sesha Reddi. [1977] 3 SCR 261 and we find tha