Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The plaintiff-appellant is in the Regular Second Appeal against the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar dated 30.09.1988.

In the considered opinion of this Court, following questions of law arise in the present case:-

1. Whether a widow, who is provided with usufruct of some part of land during her lifetime without giving any right of succession, is entitled to claim that right given to her in the testamentary document has enlarged into the full ownership in terms of Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956?
2. Whether in the absence of the pleadings of the previous suit, having 1 of 9 been brought on the file, whether the Court is justified in returning a finding that the subsequent suit is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC?

The undisputed facts are that the dispute is with regard to the estate of Chanda Singh. He executed a testamentary document dated 22.07.1960. As per the testamentary document, he bequeathed his entire property in favour of three sons but also recorded that if on his death, his widow is alive then she will be entitled to usufruct of the 1/4th share of the property, during her lifetime.

Learned trial Court decreed the suit, whereas learned First Appellate Court has reversed the judgment passed by the learned trial Court.

Now the stage is set for discussing the questions of law.

2 of 9

1. Whether a widow, who is provided with usufruct of some part of the land during her lifetime without giving any right of succession, is entitled to claim that right given to her in the testamentary document has enlarged into the full ownership in terms of Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956?

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the judgment Sadhu Singh Vs. Gurdwara Sahib Narike & ors. (2006) 8 SCC 75, has held that if the testamentary document is executed by an absolute owner, then any testamentary document providing for a limited estate in favour of the 4 of 9 female Hindu would not enlarge into the full ownership. Hon'ble the Supreme Court while deciding the case has considered the judgment passed in V. Tulasamma Vs. V. Shesha Reddi, (1977) 3 SCR 261 and other judgments of the Supreme Court. The relevant part of the judgment is extracted as under:-