Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. Gavai, Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Mukatlal – Appellant
Versus
Kailash Chand (D) Through Lrs. And Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s). 6460 of 2024 Arising out of SLP (Civil) No(s). 12842 of 2018
Decided On : 16-05-2024
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 14(1) – Female Hindu succession – For establishing full ownership on undivided joint family estate under Section 14(1) of Succession Act Hindu female must not only be possessed of property but she must have acquired property and such acquisition must be either by way of inheritance or devise, or at a partition or “in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance” or by gift or be her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription – There is not even a whisper in plaint that deceased widow or plaintiff himself were ever in possession of suit property – Suit was filed by pleading that suit property was a joint Hindu family property and defendant-appellant had consented to give half share of suit property to plaintiff on his demand – This assertion was denied by defendant – Since, deceased widow was never in possession of suit property, as a necessary corollary Revenue suit for partition claiming absolute ownership under Section 14(1) of Hindu Succession Act could not be maintained by her adopted son, plaintiff by virtue of inheritance – Impugned Judgments reversed and set aside and Revenue Suit filed by plaintiff dismissed. (Paras 24, 25, 26, 28, 29 and 30)
Facts of the case:
Core question of law involved in this appeal is as to right of plaintiff being legal heir of Hindu widow to enforce her right of succession in unpartitioned Joint Hindu Family property by virtue of Section 14(1) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by filing a suit in Revenue Court.
Findings of Court:
Judgment dated 2nd November, 2017 rendered by Division Bench and Judgment dated 21st July, 2006 rendered by Single Judge are hereby reversed and set aside.
Result : Appeal allowed.
1. Leave granted.
2. The instant appeal by special leave challenges the final judgment and order dated 2nd November, 2017 passed by learned Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1029 of 2006 whereby the appeal preferred by the appellant questioning the legality and validity of the judgment dated 21st July, 2006 passed by learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1587 of 1993 was dismissed.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to by their rank in the Revenue Court.
4. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter in the proper perspective, it would be beneficial to reproduce the genealogical table/pedigree of the families of the parties.
Chronological List of Events: -
Dates | Event |
After the death of Kishan Lal, Hindu Undivided Family(HUF) property devolved among his two sons, Mangilal and Madho Lal. | |
1912 | Mangilal passed away. (Survived by his son, Kanwarlal) |
1929 | Madho Lal passed away (Issueless, survived by his widow- Smt. Nandkanwarbai) |
09.02.1949 | Kanwarlal executed a will in favour of his son, Mukat Lal (appellant herein). |
1954 | Kanwarlal Passed Away. |
First Set of Legal Proceedings | |
1958 | Smt. Nandkanwarbai filed Civil Suit No. 11of 1958 for declaration of title and possession in respect of the suit property. |
21.05.1959 | Civil Suit No. 11 of 1958 was dismissed however the Civil Judge held that Smt. Nandkanwarbai had the right to be maintained out of the suit property. |
12.06.1959 | Smt. Nandkanwarbai adopted Kailash Chand(original respondent herein). |
12.07.1966 | Mukat Lal preferred Appeal No. 64 of 1966 against order dated 21.05.1959 passed in Civil Suit No. 11 of 1958. |
09.02.1968 | Civil Judge allowed Appeal No. 64 of 1966 and set aside the order to the extent that it gave Smt. Nandkanwarbai the right to be maintained out of the suit property. Aggrieved, Smt. Nandkanwarbai preferred SB Civil Second Appeal No. 347 of 1968 |
1972 | Smt. Nandkanwarbai passed away. Kailash Chand was substituted as legal representative of deceased Smt. Nandkanwarbai in 1973. |
20.03.1973 | High Court allowed SB Civil Second Appeal No. 347 of 1968 and held that Smt. Nandkanwarbai was entitled to the right of maintenance out of the suit property, she being the widow of the deceased coparcener in joint Hindu family property. |
Present Proceedings | |
20.06.1979 | Revenue Suit No. 37 of 1979 under section 53 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1956 was filed by Kailash Chand, for partition of the suit property, in the capacity of the legal heir of his adopted mother Smt. Nandkanwarbai. |
14.12.1983 | Revenue Suit No. 37 of 1979 was allowed and decreed by Sub Divisional Officer, Bundi wherein it was held that Kailash Chand being the sole legal heir of Smt. Nandkanwarbai has coparcenary rights over the lands belonging to Madho Lal. |
1984 | Mukat Lal preferred Appeal No. 12 of 1984 challenging order dated 14.12.1983 before Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota. |
31.01.1986 | Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota allowed Appeal No. 12 of 1984 and decree passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bundi dated 14.12.1983 was set aside. |
1986 | Kailash Chand preferred Second Appeal being S.A. 120 of 1986 before Board of Revenue, Ajmer. |
12.03.1992 | Board of Revenue, Ajmer dismissed S.A. 120 of 1986 |
1993 | Kailash Chand filed a Writ Petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1587 of 1993 before High Court challenging the order passed by Board of Revenue, Ajmer dated 12.03.1992. |
21.07.2006 | Ld. Single Judge allowed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1587 of 1993 and set aside the judgments passed by Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota and Board of Revenue, Ajmer. |
2006 | Mukat Lal filed a Writ Appeal being DB Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1029 of 2006 before the Division Bench. |
02.11.2017 | Ld. Division Bench dismissed DB Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1029 of 2006 and upheld the order of the Ld. Single Judge dated 21.07.2006. |
06.02.2018 | Present SLP was filed. |
5. The core question of law involved in this appeal is as to the right of the plaintiff Kailash Chand be
Female Hindu succession – For establishing full ownership on undivided joint family estate under Section 14(1) of Succession Act Hindu female must not only be possessed of property but she must have ....
(1) Female Hindu inheritance – Hindu woman’s right to maintenance was not and is not an empty formality or an illusory claim being conceded as a matter of grace and generosity – Hindu woman’s right t....
Hindu Women’s right to maintenance – Right of maintenance is sufficient for property given in lieu thereof to transform into absolute ownership, by way of Section 14(1) of HSA, 1956.
A female Hindu retains absolute ownership of her inherited property despite remarriage, and her children from a subsequent marriage are entitled to inherit such property.
The possession in lieu of maintenance over a specified property must be on the female's independent right to sustain a claim under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act.
The court affirmed that children of a deceased woman inherit her estate under the Hindu Succession Act, irrespective of their birth order, unless adoption is proven, as the mother's remarriage does n....
![Prahaladhan, [Died & Legal Heirs Impleaded] VS Pankajakshi - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 539](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Kerala_1.png)
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 14(1) and (2) of the Hindu Succession Act in the context of a will, emphasizing the intention of t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liberal interpretation of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act to advance the objective of enlarging the limited interest possessed by Hindu ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
