GUNDA SUBBARAYUDU Vs. GOPISETTI VENGAMMA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 2nd defendant in O.S. No. 58/60 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Dhone, called Vengamma is the second wife of one Chinna Kondanna-The first wife also was called Vengamnu, who is now dead. By his first wife, he had two sons, Subbaiah and Chinna Obulapathi. Kondayya, the 1st plaintiff, is the only son of Subbaiah. Plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the issues of China Obulapathi and the 6th plaintiff is his widow and mother of plaintiffs 2 to 5. The facts that gave rise to this suit are shortly as follows. The 1st defendant's husband, Chinna Kondanna, died in the year 1918. In 1921, Chinna Kondanna's mother, Kesamma, acting as the guardian of China Kondanna's minor sons, executed maintenance deed, Ex.A-1 dated 2-2-21 in favour of the 1st defendant settling on her 18 cents of cultivable land and a house in Nandyal for her maintenance, she being the step-mother of the minors. Ever since, the 1st defendant was in possession of these 18 cents of land and the house. But on 25-11-57, she sold the house under Ex.A-2 dated 25-11-57 to the 2nd defendant. This gave rise to the suit in which it is prayed for a declaration that the alienation made by the 1st defendant in favour of the 2nd defendant is not valid and binding on the plaintiff after the life-time of the 1st defendant. The plaintiffs case was that the 1st defendant had only life-interest in the property settled on her under Ex.-A-1 and that, therefore, any alienation made by her is invalid beyond her life-time and that the plaintiffs, who are her step-sons, are entitled to the same. On the other hand it is contended, by the defendants that, by reason of Section 14 (1) of the Hindu Succession Act, the limited interest, which the 1st defendant had in the property settled under Ex. A-1, became an absolute interest i.e. the 1st defendant, who was,under Ex.A-1 only a limited owner,became a full owner within the meaning of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. On the other hand it was the plaintiff' contention that, in view of sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act, the limited interest of the 1st defendant conferred on her under Ex. A-1 did not become a full interest. The trial Court held that the 1st defendant became a full owner under Section 14 (1) and, therefore, the plaintiffs are not entitled to a declaration asked for. The suit was, therefore, dismissed. But on appeal by the plaintiffs, the learned District Judge, Kurnool, held that the 1st defendant acquired the property only under Ex.A-1 and that, therefore, in view of sub-section (2) of Section 14, sub section (1) of section 14 is not applicable and that the 1st defendant continues to be only a limited owner. In that view, he reversed the" decision of the trial Court and gave a decree in plaintiff's favour. Hence, this second appeal died by the 2nd defendant.

(2.) The point for determination in this second appeal is whether the interest of the 1st defendant under Ex.A-1 became full ownership by reason of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. In order to decide this question, it is necessary to refer to the document itself and to Section 14. The document is in Telugu and the relevant portion may be translated as follows:

(3.) It is clear from the document that the property was given to the 1st defendant tot towards her maintenance. That was in the year 1921, the husband having died in the year 1919. The document recites that she is the step-mother of the minors and that there was no amicability between her and her step-sons and that she claimed maintenance and separate residence. Therefore, on the advice elders, the property was given to the 1st defendant to be enjoyed by her for her life. The document further provided that, after her life time, both the land and the house shall revert to the minors: One curious feature is that there is not. In express prohibition against any alienation. Whatever that be, the case had been contested in both the Courts below and also before me on the footing that it 1st defendant was only a limited owner under Ex. A-1.