PANCHANAN SAMANTA Vs. LAKSHMI MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal at the instance of the plaintiff-appellant arises out of the judgment and decree dt. 12th May, 1979 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge. 2nd Court, Hooghly, in Title Appeal No. 272 of 1978 reversing the judgment and decree dated 18th Aug, 1978 passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court of Serampore in Title Suit No. 12 of 1976.

(2.) The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for declaration of title and for possession stating that the suit property originally belonged to the father of the plaintiff, Hiralal Samanta, since deceased, who during his lifetime executed a deed of settlement in favour of his Second wife, Nadhubala on 9th March, 1934. The plaintiff's case was that he is the only son of Hiralal Samanta begotten by the first wife of Hiralal and after the death of Hiralal in Chaitira 1343 B.S. he became the only heir of Hiralal. The defence case was that by virtue of a deed of gift Nadhubala had become absolute owner of the suit property and her title in respect of 1/5th share had been confirmed in T.G. No. 44 of 1957. The defendants also claimed that by executing the deed of gift Nadhubala gave away the suit property in their favour and they are still in possession thereof.

(3.) In the suit being Title Suit No. 12 of 1976, the learned Munsif held, inter alia, that on the day of coming into force of Hindu Succession Act 1956, Nadhubala had a limited estate as the suit property was not acquired by her by inheritance from Hiralal and, as such, the said limited estate had extinguished after her death and, consequently, the deed of gift made by Nadhubala was void. Against the said decision of the learned Munsif, the defendant-respondents preferred an appeal being Title Appeal No. 272 of 1978 and the lower Appellate Court by its judgment and decree dated 12th May, 1979 allowed the appeal holding, inter alia, that the previous suit filed by Nadhubala being Title Suit No. 44 of 1959 was res judicata in the matter of getting any relief by the plaintiff and, secondly, it was held that after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, by virtue of S.14 of the said Act, the property possesed by a female, whether acquired before or after the commencement of the said Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner.