MEDICHERLA VENKATRATNAM Vs. SIDDANI PALAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises a very interesting question whether a Hindu widow, after she divested herself of her widow's estate by alienating the same to third parties, would get back the rights which she enjoyed previously, in other words limited ownership, when she repurchased the same property from the transferees so as to enlarge her limited ownership into a full ownership under section 14 (I) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

(2.) To appreciate the question involved in this appeal, the following facts may be stated: The plaintiff is the appellant and the suit filed by him as a reversioner for recovery of the suit land was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge, Amalapuram. He rested his claim on the fact that he is the nearest reversioner to the last male-holder, Ramaiah, his paternal uncle, that the widow of the said Ramaiah, Lakshmamma, alienated her widow's estate in favour of three persons including the ist defendant under Exhibits A-19, A-20 and A-21 and that succession opened out on 17th September, 1961, after the death of Lakshmamma, the widow of Ramaiah. It may be necessary to state that the said Ramaiah, Thathaiah and Sooraiah were divided brothers.

(3.) Thathaiah had no sons and his only daughter is the second defendant. Sooraiah is the youngest of the three brothers and his son is the plaintiff. All the three brothers died before the year 1937. Lakshmamma, the widow of Ramaiah alienated her widow's estate under three sale deeds, Exhibits A-19, A-20 and A-21, the last deed being in favour of the 1st defendant, i.e., her sister's daughter. The present plaintiff filed two suits, O.S. Nos. 205 and 206 of 1937 against the widow impleading the alienees in the Court of the District Munsif, Razole, praying for declaration that he was the nearest reversioner to the last male-holder and that the alienations were not binding upon him. Those two suits were decreed on 27th January, 1937, as prayed for by the plaintiff. Subsequent to the date of the decree, Lakshmamma, the widow, acquired the very same properties from the transferees under three sale deeds, Exhibits A-26, A-27 of the date 14th October, 1940, and A-28 of the date 16th October, 1940. The recitals in the said three sale deeds are to the effect that since the rights of the reversioner were recognised by the Court and that the alienations will hold good only during the life-time of the widow, they were reconveying the properties for consideration to the widow. The widow, Lakshmamma, died on 17th September, 1961 and as the succession opened out, the reversioner filed the suit for recovery of possession of the suit properties. Before she died, the widow executed a settlement deed, Exhibit A-29 on 25th March, 1957, in favour of the 1st defendant's husband (D.W, 5) and D.W. 5 in his turn settled the same properties on his wife, the 1st defendant under Exhibit A-30 dated 29th August, 1959.