Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
V. D. Bhargava, J.
SMT.JANAK DULARI - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT JUDGE, KANPUR - Respondents
Civil Misc. Writ 2348 Of 1957
Decided On : 03/23/1960
HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 - SECTION 14 - ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY BY FEMALE HINDU - EFFECT OF DECREE DECLARING LIMITED RIGHT PRIOR TO ACT - SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 14 - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Janak Dulari, was the widow of Maheshi Lal Pande, who died in 1903. After the death of her husband, Janak Dulari and her sister-in-law, Rukmini Kuer, became the owners of the property. Rukmini Kuer died in 1912, leaving behind two daughters, Sundar Kuer and Janak Dulari. Sundar Kuer died in 1925 without leaving any issue, and Janak Dulari became the sole owner of the property. In 1948, Janak Dulari transferred certain property, and the opposite parties, who were distant reversioners, filed a suit challenging the sale. The suit was decreed, and it was declared that Janak Dulari was only a limited owner. In 1955, Janak Dulari filed a writ petition in the High Court, which directed that a sum of Rs. 10,000 be paid to her and the rest be retained in the court of the District Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that by virtue of the power given under the Hindu Succession Act, Janak Dulari became the absolute owner of the property and any orders passed before the Act would not have any effect. The court further held that Sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act, which provides that nothing 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 a 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, did not apply in this case because the property had not been acquired by a decree, but had been acquired by inheritance.
Issues: Whether the decree declaring Janak Dulari as a limited owner prior to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, would continue to be effective after the enactment of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the decree declaring Janak Dulari as a limited owner prior to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, would not continue to be effective after the enactment of the Act. The court reasoned that Section 14(1) of the Act gave widows and daughters an absolute right in the property, and that Sub-section (2) of Section 14 would only apply when the property itself was acquired by means of a decree. In this case, the property had been acquired by inheritance, and therefore, any decree which had been passed declaring a right therein would not be effective.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and directed that the money which was in deposit with the District Judge be paid to Janak Dulari. The court also held that after her death, her heirs, who were the next reversioners, were entitled to the money as absolute owners.
( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by one Smt. Janak Duhri who is since dead.
( 2 ) THERE was one Maheshi Lal Pande who left two widows on his death in the year 1903; one was Smt. Rukmini Kuer and the other Smt. Bhajni Kuer. Smt. Rukmini Kuer died in the year 1912 and left behind two daughters, Smt. Sundar Kuer and Smt. Janak Dular. Bhajni Kuer also died in 1923. After the death of Maheshi Lal Pande, his widows Smt. Rukmini Kuer and Smt. Bhajni Kuer were the owners, and after the death of Smt. Rukmini Kuer her daughters Smt. Sundar Kuer and Janak Dulari became the owners. Sundar Kuer died also in the year 1925 without leaving any issue and according to the petitioner, thereafter Janak Dulari became the owner of the property.
( 3 ) THE property involved in the suit is Zamindari property in several villages. After the abolition of zamindari, compensation amounting Rs. 11,900 was awarded. The compensation was for villages Saraipur, Patra, Sarva and Kamir, while a sum of Rs. 9200 was awarded in respect of certain other villages in Kanpur tehsil. Thus, in all Rs. 21,000 was awarded as compensation for the whole village property belonging to Maheshi Lal Pande. Opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3, who appear to be distant reversioners contested the payment of this amount.
( 4 ) IT may be mentioned that when Maheshi Lal Pande died, the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 had not come into force and even when Rukmini Kuer, Bhajni Kuer and Sundar Kuer died, that act was not in force. Thereafter the rights of Sundar Kuer and Janak Dulari were that of a limited owner. A dispute having arisen between opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 on the one hand and Smt. Janak Dulaii on the other, in 1926 she filed a suit that she was a limited owner till her life time after the death of Sundar Kuer daughter of Maheshi Lal Pande. The suit was decreed and it was declared that she was a reversioner for her life.
( 5 ) IN 1948 Janak Dulari transferred certain property upon which opposite parties 2 and 3 filed a suit, No. 2 of 1948 in the court of Civil Judge, Kanpur and in that suit a declaration was sought that the sale could not be binding as against the next reversioners, as Janak Dulari was only a limited owner. That suit was also decreed. On 9-8-1955 an attempt was made by Smt. Janak dulari to get this compensation amount and then a writ petition was filed in this Court in which it was held that a sum of Rs. 10,000 was to be paid to Smt. Janak Dulari and the rest be retained in the court of the District Judge.
( 6 ) AFTER all these proceedings had taken place the Hindu Succession Act was passed which came into force on 17-6-56. That Act gave widows and daughters an absolute right in the property. Section 14 (1) reads as follows:
"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. "
After the coming into force of this law, an application was made to the District Judge that the balance of the compensation money, which was in deposit should be paid to the petitioner. The district Judge was of opinion that now Smt. Janak Dulari was entitled t6 the property, but he was of opinion that unless a separate suit had been filed, the money could not be paid. Against that order this writ petition has been filed.
( 7 ) THERE cannot be any doubt that by virtue of the power which has been given under the Hindu succession Act Smt. Janak Dulari became the absolute owner of the property and any orders passed before the Act would not have any effect.
( 8 ) RELIANCE was placed by learned counsel for the opposite party on Sub-section (2) of Section 14 which is in the following words:
"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 a civil court or under an award where the terms of the gift, will or other in
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
