SMT. FEKAN BAI Vs. SUKHDEV DHRUW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law involved, formulated and to be answered by this Court in this second appeal preferred by legal representatives of defendant No.1 is as under:-

(2.) The imperative facts required for determination of above-stated substantial question of law are as under:- [For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred hereinafter as per their status shown in the suit before the trial Court]

(3.) Mr.P.R.Patankar, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that both the Courts below are absolutely unjustified in holding that the parties are governed by the provisions of the Act of 1956, whereas they are governed by their customs in which daughter Samunda Bai is also entitled for ? of share. He would further submit that the trial Court is absolutely unjustified in granting 1/2 of share to the plaintiff and defendant No.1, as such, the second appeal deserves to be allowed. He placed reliance of the judgment passed by this Court in Smt. Butaki Bai and others Vs. Sukhbati and others 2014(3) C.G.L.J. 590.