E RAMESH Vs. P RAJINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been filed against the judgment and preliminary decree passed by the learned single Judge dated 7.10.1999 in C.S.No. 384 of 1999.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 herein filed the said suit claiming partition and for allotment of 2/5th share on the ground that the suit property originally belonged to one Ethirajulu and Andal - the parents of the appellants and the respondents. The appellants herein -defendants 1 and 2 in the suit had no objection for the share of the first respondent herein -the first plaintiff in the suit. So far as the second respondent herein is concerned, the appellants objected on the ground that she married a Muslim by converting herself into Islam and as such, she is not entitled for the share. The other objection of the appellant's that B-Schedule property being a residential house and the appellants herein being the male members of the Hindu Joint Family, till they opt for partition, it is not open to respondents 1 and 2 herein to seek partition.

(3.) SO far as the first question is concerned, the learned single Judge referred to Section 26 of the Hindu Succession Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and held that the bar for inheritance is only in respect of legal heirs of the convert. The individual, who convert himself to other religion from Hinduism, will not forego the right of any inheritance. He also relied upon the judgment in the case of Asoke Naidu v. Raymond S. Mulu, AIR 1976 Cal. 272.