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

1949 Supreme(Mad) 132

SATYANARAYANA RAO, VISWANATHA SASTRI
Kuppuswami Asari – Appellant
Versus
Manickasari – Respondent


Advocates:
G. Ramakrishna Aiyar and P.N. Sundaresan for Appellant.
T.R. Arunachalam for Respondent.

Judgment

Viswanatha Sastri, J:-The question that arises for decision in this case is whether the Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act II of 1929 has any application to succession to the stridhanam property of a Hindu lady or whether the succession is governed by the ordinary rule of Hindu law unaffected by the provisions of Act II of 1929.

One Rajammal was the last owner of the property now in dispute. Her husband, Arunachala Asari had a sister and a sister’s son from whom the plaintiff has purchased the property. The defendants set up title of the paternal uncle’s son of Arunachala Asari as heir to the property of Rajammal. The question is whether the sister and sister’s son of Arunachala Asari could be deemed to be stridhanam heirs of Rajammal in preference to paternal uncle’s son of Arunachala. If the ordinary Hindu law of succession were to apply it is clear that Rajammal having died without issue, her husband and his sapindas would be the heirs to her stridhanam property. The question is whether in finding out succession to stridhanam property of Rajammal we have to adopt the original rule of Hindu law regulating succession to stridhanam property and find out the husband’s s




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