2020 Supreme(Bom) 1383
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.
Simoes Salvador Lorete Da Costa (since deceased) through L.Rs. Salvador Savio Da Casta and others - Appellants
Versus
Vicente Henriques Nicolau Da Costa and others – Respondents
S. A. No. 81 of 2013
Decided On : 06-01-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : R. Menezes
For the Respondent: Sudesh Usgaonkar and Ms. Marie Rosette Pereira
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the Deed of Gift and the forfeiture of the eldest son's share in the property, as well as the devolution of the youngest brother's share on all other members of the joint family.
Headnote:
Succession - Portuguese Civil Code - 1/4th share, 1/8th share, 5/8th share - Deed of Gift - Forfeiture of share - Relinquishment deed - Inventory proceedings
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a dispute between the first two sons of Vincent Salvador Felicio da Costa through his third wife regarding the partition of the family estate. The elder brother filed a suit for partition, and the younger brother filed an appeal against the preliminary decree. The dispute primarily revolves around the elder brother's claim to a 5/8th share in the property and the validity of a Deed of Gift executed by the eldest son in 1984, gifting his entire share to the elder brother's wife.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the elder brother had validly secured a 5/8th share in the property and that the Deed of Gift executed by the eldest son was valid. The Court also held that the youngest brother's share in the property must devolve on all other members of the joint family due to his refusal to claim any share in the property.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the Deed of Gift, the forfeiture of the eldest son's share, the partition of the property, and the youngest brother's relinquishment of his share.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court determined that the Deed of Gift executed by the eldest son was valid and that he had not forfeited his share in the property. Additionally, the Court held that the youngest brother's share must devolve on all other members of the joint family due to his refusal to claim any share in the property.
Final Decision: The Second Appeal was dismissed, and the Court refused to interfere with the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the appellate Court. The Court also held that the youngest brother's share in the property must devolve on all other members of the joint family. No order on costs was issued.
JUDGMENT :
Vincent Salvador Felicio da Costa was the common ancestor. First, in early 1900s, he married Maria Carmelina Florinda da Costa and had two sons through her. But his wife died soon after giving birth to the second child; within hours, the child too died. For the record, I may mention their names: Rosario Fernando Alex da Costa and Jose da Costa—the infant that died. When his wife died leaving behind the two children, the succession opened up, and the inventory proceedings took place.
2. In terms of Portuguese Eivil Code, Vincente da Costa (“Senior Vincente”) retained his ½ share of the property; the other ½ share, that is the moiety of his deceased wife, devolved on the two sons, each succeeding to ½th share in the total property. But, as we have noted, the second son died as an infant, hours after his mother’s death. With that, another round of notional succession took place. In the absence of descendants, the infant had only an ascendant, his father, to succeed. So, the second son’s ¼th share devolved on Senior Vincente.
3. Later, Vincent Salvador married Maria Florinda Menezes. He took into that marriage his original 1/2 share, keeping to himself 1/4th share he had succeeded to as an ascendant. Through the second wife, Senior Vincente had a daughter: Maria Carmelina Quitera Aleluia da Costa (“Maria Carmelina”). Then, the Second wife too died.
4. With the second wife’s death in 1918, once again the family estate was notionally divided. Senior Vicente retained 1/2 of the 1/2 share he had brought into the marriagethat is, 1/4th share of the total property. The remaining “1/2 of 1/2 (1/4th) devolved on Maria Carmelina, his daughter through the second wife.
5. So, then, Senior Vincente married Maria Elixena Florinda Da Costa, his third wife. Through her, Senior Vincent had three daughters and three sons. The daughters are Maria Benedita Florina da Costa, Rosa Maria Carmelina da Costa, and Maria Tereza Celina da Costa; the sons are Vincente Henriques Nicolay da Costa (“elder brother”, respondent No. 1), Simoes Salvador Lorete da Costa (“younger brother”, appellant No. 1), and Agnelo Lino Alexandre da Costa (“youngest brother”, respondent No. 3).
First Branch :
6. In terms of the provisions of succession prevalent in the community under the Portuguese Civil Code, once a person gets married the estates of the spouses get merged; thus, there is a communion of assets. Once either spouse dies, the surviving spouse’s half share remains intact, and succession opens vis-à-vis the deceased spouse. Here, when Senior Vincent’s first wife died, she had left behind her two sons to succeed to her half share. Thus, the two sons divided between them the mother’s share equally. In other words, from the total property, the father retained 50% and each son 25% : ½ for the father and 1/4th each for the two sons. True, the second son died a few hours after his mother’s death, but, by then, succession opened, and he came to own 1/4th property.
7. After the second son’s death, as he had no successors; his father, as his ascendant, succeeded to that estate. So, the father possessed 3/4th, and the surviving son Rosaria had 1/4th share.
Second Branch :
8. Similarly, when his second wife died, again the succession opened. But when senior Vincent carried his property into the communion, the property he succeeded to as an ascendant to his deceased son remained untouched. Thus, after his second wife’s death, his daughter through the second wife succeeded to 1/4th share of the estate. The rest remained with the father.
Third Branch :
9. Eventually, Senior Vincent married the third time and had six children. The third wife survived. Thus, when Senior Vincent died in 1951, the succession opened vis-à-vis the branch of the third wife and inventory proceedings took place. His half share was open for succession: 1/4th share that devolved on him through his infa