OPINION OF THE FULL BENCH

VEERASWAMI, C.J. (9-10-1974) :- This reference comes before us because of the conflict of opinion on the question whether S. 8 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 is applicable to a case where a husband died intestate before the Act came into force and his widow inherited his properties, but was not possessed of those properties and died subsequent to the commencement of the Act. One of us was a party to the reference. Since then has come Daya Singh v. Dhankaur AIR 1974 SC 665 which, in almost similar circumstances and after dealing with the conflict of opinion of some of the High Courts, answered the question in the affirmative.

2. Were the question res integra, it would have been open to debate and doubt as to whether S. 8 was intended to cover reversionary succession as in the instant case. The Act was, no doubt, intended to amend and codify the law regarding intestate succession. The intention of the Act was to cover, as far as possible, the entire field. That was why Sec. 4 gave the Act overriding effect Yet it visualises that any text, rule or interpretation of Hindu Law or any custom or usage as part of that law in force immediately before the