Court No. - 42

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 968 of 2022

Appellant :- Preksha Singh And Another

Respondent :- Hemendra Pal Singh Alias

Harendra Singh

Counsel for Appellant :- Madhav Jain

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

Appellant no. 1/1-father of the first appellant filed

an application before the Additional Family Judge,

Court No. 1, Agra, claiming Rs. 7,00,000/- from the

respondent/son-in-law of the appellant no. 1/1. As

per settlement entered into between the first

appellant and the respondent/husband before the

Mediation Center of this Court, Rs. 11,00,000/- was

due and payable to the first appellant towards

alimony and streedhan. It is not being disputed

that in compliance of the settlement, Rs.

4,00,000/- was paid by the respondent.

Pursuant to the settlement, a joint application was

filed before the Court below under Section 13B of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'Act 1955')

seeking divorce on mutual consent. During

pendency of the proceedings, the first appellant

(wife) died. In the circumstances, the respondent

made an application that the matter has rendered

infructuous, therefore, the pending proceedings be

dismissed as such. Accordingly, the impugned

order came to be passed dismissing the

application under Section 13B of the Act 1955. The

order is under challenge.

In the pending proceeding, an application came to

be filed by the appellant No. 1/1, i.e., father of the

deceased first appellant claiming balance amount

of the settlement. The learned counsel for the

appellant submits that appellant no. 1/1 being

father of the deceased first appellant is entitled to

streedhan to which his daughter was entitled by

operation of law in view of Section 15 and 16 of

the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The streedhan

would devolve upon him after the death of her

daughter.

In this backdrop, it is submitted that the Court

below should have considered the application of

the appellant before dismissing the application

pending under Section 13B of Act 1955.

Be that as it may, we are of the opinion that in

proceedings under Section 13B of Act 1955, the

appellant No. 1/1 had no locus to raise any issue

with regard to inheritance. The matter of divorce

was between the parties and since, one of the

parties (first appellant) died during pendency of

the proceedings, she continues to be the wife of

the respondent for all practical purposes,

including, the property that she might have

inherited. In the circumstances, the remedy

available to the appellant No. 1/1 is to institute a

separate proceedings raising claim with regard to

property (streedhan) and its quantum in case that

devolved upon him before the appropriate forum,

in accordance with law. The respondent being the

husband would also may have a claim on the

property of the deceased wife.

In view thereof, we do not find any illegality,

infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned

order passed by the Court below. The issue of

inheritance is, however, kept open.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed with the

aforesaid liberty.

Order Date :- 12.1.2023

Mukesh Pal

Digitally signed by :-

MUKESH PAL

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad