BITOLA KUNWARI Vs. GIRAND SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a widow's second appeal in a suit for maintenance against her deceased husband's brothers that has been dismissed by both the courts below.

(2.) THERE is no dispute about the facts. One Subedar Singh had three sons, Girand Singh, Bharat Singh and Vikram Singh. The plaintiff is Vikram Sigh's widow. Her husband died in the month of Jeth of Sambat 2010 some 15 months after her marriage leaving him surviving Subedar Singh, Girand Singh and Bharat Singh. It is not clear whether Vikram Singh left any property. At any rate it is not alleged that the plaintiff inherited any property from Vikram Singh. She was maintained by her father-in-law Subedar Singh after her husband's death. Unfortunately the father-in-law also died, according to the plaint allegation, in February, 1958, and Girand Singh and Bharal Singh equally divided the land between themselves and did not give anything for the plaintiff's maintenance after the Rabi crop of 1959. The suit was filed in forma pauperis on 14th March, 1970 claiming Rupees 60/- per month as maintenance. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiff was being maintained by her father. The lower appellate court maintained the dismissal of the suit but on the ground that her father-in-law did not have any coparcenary property when her husband died.

(3.) SECTION 18 provides for maintenance of a wife by her husband. SECTION 19 provides for maintenance of the widowed daughter-in-law, in the following terms: "19. Maintenance of widowed daughter-in-law - (1) A Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be entitled to be maintained after the death of her husband by her father-in-law : Provided and to the extent that she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property or, where she has no property of her own, is unable to obtain maintenance - (a) from the estate of her husband or her father or mother, or (b) from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate. (2) Any obligation under sub-sec. (1) shall not be enforceable if the father-in-law has not the means to do so from any coparcenary property in his possession out of which the daughter-in-law has not obtained any share, and any such obligation shall cease on the re-marriage of the daughter-in-law. SECTION 21 defines dependants, and the relevant Clause (vii) runs as follows: - "21. Dependants defined - For the purposes of this Chapter, "dependants" means the following relatives of the deceased (vii) any widow of his son or of a son of his predeceased son, so long as she does not remarry; provided and to the extent that she is unable to obtain maintenance from her husband's estate or from her son or daughter, it any, or his or her estate; or in the case of a grandson's widow, also from her father-in-law's estate. " SECTION 22 provides as follows: "22 Maintenance of dependants (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-sec. (2) the heirs of a deceased Hindu are bound to maintain the dependants of the deceased out of the estate inherited by them from the deceased. (2) Where a dependant has not obtained, by testamentary or intestate succession, any share in the estate of a Hindu dying after the commencement of this Act, the dependant shall be entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, to maintenance from those who take the estate. (3) The liability of each of the persons who take the estate shall be in proportion to the value of the share or part of the estate taken by him or her. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2) or sub-sec. (3), no person who is himself or herself a dependant shall be liable to contribute to the maintenance of others, if he or she has obtained a share or part, the value of which, is, or would, if the liability to contribute were enforced, becomes less than what would be awarded to him or her by way of maintenance under this Act. "