Citations: SC Civil Appeal No. 375 of 2007
Date of Judgement: 6 November, 2015
Court: Supreme Court of India
Case Type: Suit Property
Appellant: Jupudy Pardha Sarathy
Respondent: Pentapati Rama Krishna and Ors.
Bench: M.Y. Eqbal (J), C. Nagappan (J)
Referred: Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Facts:
P. Venkata Subba Rao was the owner of the said suit property. He had three wives. Among these 3 wives, only the second one was blessed with two sons and a daughter, including defendant- Narasimha Rao. Now the third wife (namely Veeraraghavamma) was named the owner by the execution of WILL of P. Venkata Subba Rao in the year 1920. She later died in 1976 but before that, in 1971 she executes a WILL of herself in favour of defendant Pentapati Subba Rao. Now the case in this particular situation is of the defendant where he thinks that P. Narasimha Rao has no right to transfer the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff.
As it is the particular case was based on the fact that he purchased the suit property from P. Narasimha Rao who was having a vested interest in respect of the said property as same as the wife (Veeraraghavamma) of the deceased P. Venkata Subba Rao. According to the plaintiff-appellant, during the life time of Veeraghavamma she enjoyed the properties and after her death the property devolved upon the vendors.
Legal Issues:
Is the widow of the deceased P. Venkata Subba Rao obtaining an absolute interest in the property via the operation of Section 14 of the Act?
Ration & Decision:
Section 14(1) may be interpreted as a person is the legal owner of a piece of property even though they do not have actual possession of it. The wide definition of “possessed by” in Section 14(1) of the Act states that if a widow was granted a share of the marital estate in a preliminary judgment before or at the time of the Act’s passing, but had not yet gained real possession, she would be regarded to be in possession of the property. In Section 14(2), “restricted estate” includes both the limited interest indicated in Section 14(1) and any additional transferee limitations.
Conclusion:
- The Court held that, the original owner of the property Mr. P. Venkata Subba Rao thought looking at his wife Veeraraghavamma she has a pre-existing right to be maintained out of his property. He thought that he was getting weak and weaker physically and may not survive for long. He therefore, decided to distribute his properties to his family members. For the maintenance of his third wife Veeraraghavamma, he gave the tiled house with site and compound wall and she shall enjoy the property for life in lieu of maintenance. She will also be entitled to fetch water from the well and use other facilities. The WILL was peacefully executed and no one questioned it, Veeraraghavamma continued to enjoy the property. In view of this the Section 14(1) of the Act, her limited right became absolute right to the property.
Reference:
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/29295224/
This article is written by Siddhant Raj of University of Allahabad, Intern in Legal Vidhiya.
