GADAM REDDAYYA Vs. VARAPULA VENKATARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, with the leave of the learned Judge, the crucial terms of the maintenance deed (Ex. A. 8) which fall to be considered are : -

(2.) This deed, Ex. A. 8 came into existence in the following circumstances : A widow by name Chellamma adopted the plaintiff sometime after her husbands death early in 1935. Shortly thereafter, there were some disputes between the plaintiff and the widow Chellamma, which were referred to some mediators for settlement. Ultimately, it ended in settlement evidenced by Ex. A. 8 by and under which she was given four acres of wet land and one acre of dry land to be enjoyed by her for her life and the rest of the property to be taken by the plaintiff in recognition of his rights as an adopted son. It was agreed that the cist was to be paid by each of the sharers on his or her share of the lands from that time. Chellamma executed a will in 1955 under Ex. B. 1 in favour of her nephew, but she died on the 20/08/1956, i.e. , sometime after the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 came into operation. It is because of this circumstance that the legatee under the will claimed a right to the properties in dispute as flowing from the will read in the light of the relevant provisions of the Hindu Succession Act of 1956.

(3.) The plaintiff denied the claim of the legatee to the properties on the ground that the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act do not benefit a person in his position. However, having failed to obtain possession of the properties from the legatee, he brought the suit which has given rise to this appeal for the recovery of the lands that were given to Chellamma for her maintenance, contending that the legatee could not prescribe rights higher than those conferred upon the maintenance holder, as the lands were given to her under specific restrictions.