DULAMAI Vs. KEDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri S. K. Verma and Sri Shahid Masood, the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondents respectively. The only ;km;tion that arises for determination in this appeal is as follows : Whether Dulamai alone, being the heir of Jokhu, was entitled to the property in dispute.

(2.) THE confirmed facts behind this appeal may be stated in brief. Admittedly, Jokhu was the owner of the disputed property. Somaroo was son of Jokhu through his first wife. Jokhu married for a second time and this wife Gangia had a son named Algoo through her first husband Tukur. At the time of the death of Jokhu, Somaroo (his son) and Gangia (his second wife) were alive. Subsequently, Somaroo died leaving behind his widow Dulamai, the plaintiff- appellant. Gangia also died leaving Algoo, one of the defendants. THE other defendants are the sons of Algoo.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant read out the provisions of Sections 14 and 15 of the Hindu Succession Act before me and had relied on a decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Ay i Ammal v. Subramania Asari and another, AIR 1966 Mad 369. It was contended by him that in view of the provisions of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act a female Hindu became an absolute owner of the property inherited by her and Section 15(1) elaborately gave the line of succession on her death. It was contended that the purpose of law was not to bifurcate a family property and as such Section 15 (2) was enacted in the Hindu Succession Act so that the property of a woman received from the husband remains in the family of the husband and one received from her father is retained by that family only. THE learned counsel for the other side pointed out that the case law cited has no application in the present set of facts as it was a property of a female Hindu obtained on the strength of gift and it was not a property obtained on succession.