Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"General rules of succession in the case of female hindus.--(1) The property of a female hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the rules set out in Section 16,
(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any predeceased son or daughter) and the husband;
(b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband;
(c) thirdly, upon the mother and father;
(d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and
(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1)--
(a) any property inherited by a female hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any predeceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the father; and
(b) any property inherited by a female hindu from her husband or from her father-in-law shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any predeceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the husband".

14. It is therefore, clear from the above provision that, any property inherited by a female hindu from her father or mother devolves in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased upon the heirs of the father. But, in the instant case, the second defendant did not inherit Items 1 to 4, 8 and 12 of the plaint schedule from her father Veeranna. On the other hand, she got those properties under the registered gift deed Ex. D. 2 executed in her favour on 1-5-1956 and the other items of the properties were acquired by her after the date of the said gift deed from out of her own earnings and income of the other items of the plaint schedule. It is therefore clear that, Section 15(2)(a) will not apply to the present case. On similar facts in a decision in Ayi Ammal v Subramania Asari and Another, it was held that-

15. In another decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Bobbal-lapati Kameswararao and Another v Kavuri Vasudeva Rao, it was held that--

The term "inherited" occurring in Section 15(2) in the context means "to receive property as heir" or "succession by descent". It has a restricted meaning and does not include acquisition of property by device under a Will. If wide meaning is given to sub-section (2) of Section 15 which is by way of exception to sub-section (1) it will lose its force. The word "inheritance" used in Section 14(1) also does not include "device" or a "bequest under the Will". Where a Hindu widow having no issues dies intestate, the property received by her from her mother under a Will would devolve on her husband's heirs and not on her father's or mother's heirs. Section 15(1) would apply and not Section 15(2)".