VISHWASRAO MADHAVRAO CHIPLUNKAR Vs. KAMLABAI VISHWASRAO CHIPLUNKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 10th December 1991 passed by the Tenth Additional District Judge, Pune in Regular Civil Appeal No. 809 of 1987, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30th June 1987 passed by the Third Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune in Special Civil Suit No. 251 of 1985; whereby the suit filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was decreed. The parties to the appeal are hereinafter referred to in their original capacity as they were arrayed in the suit. THE FACTS

(2.) THE facts necessary to appreciate real controversy may be stated briefly. The plaintiff No. 1 is a legally wedded wife and plaintiff No. 2 is a legitimate son of plaintiff No. 1 and Shri Vishwasrao Chiplunkar. Both of them filed a suit, being Special Civil Suit No. 251 of 1985 to seek declaration that the gift deed dated 6th July 1984 executed by Shri Vishwasrao, defendant No. 1 in favour of his second wife Smt. Hirabai, defendant No. 2 is illegal, null and void with further declaration that plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 had 2/3rd and l/3rd shares respectively; in the suit property and thereby they became full owners thereof, as such defendant No. 1 Vishwasrao had no right, title and interest muchless transferable interest in the suit property so as to transfer suit property or part thereof by gift in favour of Smt. Hirabai. Thus gift deed did not create any interest, in the suit property, in favour of Smt. Hirabai (defendant No. 2 ). The gift deed was also challenged on the ground that defendant No. 1 Vishwasrao had no authority to gift coparcenary property in favour of Hirabai without prior knowledge and consent of the plaintiffs. In addition to the decree of declaration, a decree for permanent injunction was also sought against defendants restraining them from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property with further direction directing them not to deal with it in any manner whatsoever.

(3.) THE plaint allegations are as under:-Plaintiff No. 1 Smt. Kamlabai is a legally wedded wife of defendant No. 1 Vishwasrao; whereas plaintiff No. 2 Ranjit is a son of plaintiff No. 1 and defendant No. 1. The alleged marriage of defendant No. I with defendant No. 2 Smt. Hirabai is bad and illegal being hit by the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriage Act, 1946.