Sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 applies to cases where a new right is created with restrictions and conditions, not to cases where pre-existing rights are recognized.

CHANDRA REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) IN this appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, with the leave of the learned Judge, the crucial terms of the maintenance deed (Ex. A. 8) which fall to be considered are : -"challamma during her life time, can raise the crops and shall enjoy the fruits and she cannot contract any debts on the security of the said lands. "

( 2 ) THIS deed, Ex. A. 8 came into existence in the following circumstances : A widow by name Chellamma adopted the plaintiff sometime after her husbands death early in 1935. Shortly thereafter, there were some disputes between the plaintiff and the widow Chellamma, which were referred to some mediators for settlement. Ultimately, it ended in settlement evidenced by Ex. A. 8 by and under which she was given four acres of wet land and one acre of dry land to be enjoyed by her for her life and the rest of the property to be taken by the plaintiff in recognition of his rights as an adopted son. It was agreed that the cist was to be paid by each of the sharers on his or her share of the lands from that time. Chellamma executed a will in 1955 under Ex. B. 1 in favour of her nephew, but she died on the 20/08/1956, i. e. , sometime after the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 came into operation. It is because of this circumstance that the legatee under the will claimed a right to the properties in dispute as flowing from the will read in the light of the relevant provisions of the Hindu Succession Act of 1956.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff denied the claim of the legatee to the properties on the ground that the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act do not benefit a person in his position. However, having failed to obtain possession of the properties from the legatee, he brought the suit which has given rise to this appeal for the recovery of the lands that were given to Chellamma for her maintenance, contending that the legatee could not prescribe rights higher than those conferred upon the maintenance holder, as the lands were given to her under specific restrictions.

( 4 ) THIS action was opposed by the defendant on the plea that the rights which he had under the will were enlarged by the provisions of Section 14 (1) of the Hindu Succession Act.

( 5 ) THE trial Court dismissed the suit accepting the defence. On appeal, the Subordinate Judge reversed the judgment of the trial Court in the view that the instant case was governed by sub-section (2) of S. 14. In second appeal by the defendant, who was dissatisfied with the judgment of the appellate Court, Justice Gopalakrishnan Nair set aside the judgment of the lower appellate Court and restored that of the trial Court being of opinion that it is sub-section (1) of section 14 that is attracted to this case. The learned Judge, however, granted leave.

( 6 ) AS the problem has to be solved with reference to the provisions of section it is useful to extract them here. "14 (1) Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner. Explanation : - In this sub-section. "property" includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her marriage or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any such property held by her as Stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act. ( 2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument or under a decree or order of civil court or under an award where the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a restricted estate in such property.

( 7 ) THE point that is posed here is whether the present case falls within the ambit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document