NARAINI DEVI Vs. RAMO DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following pedigree table illustrates the relationship of the parties. <IMG>JUDGEMENT_574_1_1976Image1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) SMT. Ramo Devi, widow of Kapur Chand (shown in the above pedigree table) obtained a money decree against her husband;s brother Nemi Chand. In execution of her decree she got attached one half-share in the double storeyed House No. 4416, situated at Agra representing it to be of the judgment-debtor. SMT. Naraini Devi, widow of Hira Lal, filed an objection petition under Order 21, Rule 58, Code of Civil Procedure against that attachment claiming the house to be her property. That objection was dismissed by the executing court on the 16/07/1962. Thereafter, she filed a suit under Order 21, Rule 63, Code of Civil Procedure to establish her claim. The suit was decreed by the trial Court. On appeal, the District Judge reversed the judgment and dismissed the suit. Naraini Devi's second appeal was summarily dismissed by the High Court. She filed a review petition which was rejected by the High Court on 23/08/1967.

(3.) WE have examined an English rendering of this document filed by the appellant, the correctness of which is not disputed by the respondent. This award states in clear, unmistakable terms that she Naraini Devi would be entitled to the rent of this house in lieu of maintenance for her lifetime, and after her death, her sons, Kapoor Chand and Nemi Chand will be owners of half share each of this house. This award further partitions this house between Kapoor Chand and Nemi Chand and allots specific portions thereof to the two brothers. A part of this house was in the occupation of a tenant at Rs. 32.00 per month. Naraini Devi was given a right to get that rent. A part of it was in the personal occupation of Kapoor Chand. The award protects and assures his right of remaining in possession of the same. A reading of this document as a whole, leaves little doubt that the only interest in this house created in favour of the widow was that she would entitled to its rent - and no more - for her lifetime. Thus the award confers on her only a restricted estate in the house within the meaning of sub-section (2) of Section 14 which says :