SAVITRI DEVI Vs. GANGS DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A. P. Singh, J. Though the record of the lower Court had not been received but on the agreement of the counsel for parties, who stated that the case does not involve nay question of fact and can be decided only on the question of law involved in the case for which the record is not necessary, the case was accordingly taken up and argument of the parties were heard.

(2.) PRESENT appeal has been filed by Smt. Savitri Devi and another who were defendants in a suit which was brought by Smt. Ganga Devi for possession after eviction and also for payment of damages. Both the plaintiffs and defendant Smt. Savitri Devi happened to be daughters of Poley from Smt. Batasa his wife. Poley died on 18-7-1951. Before his death he had executed a registered will on 6-7-1950 by which he had bequeathed the property in suit giving life interest in the property in favour of Batasa Devi, the mother of plaintiff and defendant Smt. Savitri Devi with the condition that she will not be entitled either to mortgage the property or to sell it and after her death the property would devolve on the plaintiff, one of the daughters of Poley and Batasa.

(3.) BARRISTER Ram Adhar Pandey learned counsel for appellants has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in Bapusaheb Bhausaheb Patil and another v. Smt. Ganga Bai and other, AIR 1972 Bom 16 in support of his contention that the right acquired by Smt. Batasa in the Will though was a limited right but with aid of Section 14 of the Act that right got converted into an absolute right inasmuch as she was also natural heir of Poley. Elaborating his submission BARRISTER Pandey would say that by the natural heir of Poley Smt. Batasa apart from the Will also inherited the property in suit in her own right hence in view of the provisions of Section 14 (1) that right of Smt. Batasa became an absolute right and the clog on that right of her stood removed with the result both plaintiff and the appellant will equally get the property as heirs of Smt. Batasa. This argument has been advanced on the basis of the view expressed by Bombay High Court in B. B. Patil's case (supra ).