( 1. ) THE questions referred to the Full Bench are:

(i) Whether the property inherited by a Hindu widow from her son is devested on account of her subsequent remarriage? (ii) Whether the cases of Babulal v. Sher jamakhand, Second Appeal No. 46 of 1957, D/-24-9-1954 (Nag) and Panna v. Mst. Goura, Second Appeal No. 650 of 1951, D/-19-4-1957 (Madh Pra), an the one hand or Bisahin v. Gaitri, Second Appeal No. 210 of 1938, D/-11-10-1940 (Nag) and the earlier cases on the other hand lay down the correct law? (iii) Whether a Hindu widow, who has interest in her deceased husbands property along with her Minor son under Section 3 (2) of the. Hindu Womens lights to Property Act. 1937, gets the property after the death of her minor son on account of the fluctuation of her interest to the full or that interest vanishes after her sons death and she succeeds to the property under the general Hindu Law as mother of her deceased son?

( 2. ) THE facts of the case, so far as they are relevant for this reference, are these. A genealogical tree will be necessary. We take the one given an the order of reference : DEVAJI (dead)

__________________________________|____________________________

| | Nanhu (dead)Ganpat (dead) | | | bhondu |_________________________________________________________ (Pltff. 1) | | | sarup (dead) Mst. Jugnamst. Gulja=mst. Batni (Deft. 2) (Plff. 2) (Plff. 3) | nathia (dead) Sarup held, as his ancestral property, two occupancy plots khasra Nos. 188 and 189 of village Sasawad. He died in March 1952, leaving behind. him surviving his widow, Mst. Batni (defendant 2), and a son, Nathia, besides two sisters, Mst. Jugna (plaintiff 2) and Mst. Gulja (plaintiff 3), and a first cousin Bhondu (plaintiff 1 ). Nathia died on 20-11-1952. Thereafter, by a sale deed dated 7-6-1954, Mst, Batni transferred without legal necessity the occupancy plots to Ramdayal (defendant 1), Subsequently, Mst. Batni remarried. Bhondu, Mst. Jugna and Mst. Gulja thereupon brought the suit out of which this reference arises for a declaration that the sale deed dated 7-6-1954 was ineffective against them and for possession of the two occupancy plots.

( 3. ) THE first two questions involve a consideration of the effect of Sections 2 and 5 of the Hindu Widows Remarriage Act, 1856 (XV of 1856), which are as under:

"2. All rights and interest which any widow may have in her deceased husbands property by way of maintenance, or by inheritance to her husband or to his lineal successors, or by virtue of any will or testamentary disposition conferring upon her, without express permission to remarry, only a limited interest in such property, with no power of alienating the same, shall, upon her remarriage, cease and determine as if she had then died; and the next heirs of her deceased husband. Or other persons entitled to the property on her death, shall thereupon succeed to the same. " "5. Except as in the three preceding sections is provided, a widow shall not, by reason of her remarriage, forfeit any property, or any right to which she would otherwise be entitled; and every widow who has remarried shall have the same rights of inheritance as she would have had, had such marriage been her first marriage. "

( 4. ) THE words of Section 2 of the Hindu Widows Remarriage Act, 1856, are unambiguous. all rights and interests which any widow may have in her deceased husbands property. . . . . by inheritance to her husband or to his lineal successors. . . shall. upon her remarriage, cease and determine as if she had then died. . . . . . The section is restricted in operation to the property of a Hindu which his widow has already inherited either directly from her husband or through his lineal descendants before her remarriage. The self-acquired property of any lineal descendant of her husband which a widow may inherit before her remarriage is not within the ambit of the section. It would, therefore, appear that, under Section 2, the remarriage of a Hindu widow does not entai