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

1959 Supreme(Raj) 201

MODI, CHHANGANI
Mst. Mohari – Appellant
Versus
Mst. Chukli – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ratanlal Purohit, for appellant; R.P. Goyal, for respondent No. 1

Modi, J.—This case has been placed before us as the result of a reference by a learned single Judge as it involves the determination of an interesting question of law relating to the right of a widow in a joint Hindu family, her husband having died before the Jaipur Hindu Womens Rights to Property Act, 1947 (No. 38 of 1947), which was the counter-part of the Indian Hindu Womens Rights to Property Act, 1937 (No. XVIII of 1937), had come into force.

2. The facts relating to this appeal may be conveniently stated with reference to the following pedigree table : —

Girdharilal(died somewhere near 1926 A.D.)


Widow Mst Dakhli(Deft. 2)



Gordhan(died without leaving anywidow or issue) Kishenlal Gulabchand


Widow Mst. Mohari(Plaintiff) Widow Mst. Chukli(Deft. 1)

It is admitted that Kishenlal, husband of the plaintiff Mst. Mohari, died some time in 1945 A.D. leaving behind him his widow and his brother Gulabchand and his mother Mst. Dakhli. It is also admitted that Gulabchand died in 1951 A.D. On the latters death, Mst. Mohari brought the present suit for possession of her husbands one-third share in the joint family property by partition. It is not disputed before us that Girdharilal, Kishenlal
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top