GURBACHAN KAUR Vs. PARAMJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question involved in this appeal is to the applicability of Section 14 (1) or Section 14 (2) of the Hindu Succession Act to the facts of the case and further whether a daughter-in-law under the Hindu Law is entitled to get maintenance during the life time of her husband from her father-in-law to make her an absolute owner in respect of the property bequeathed under a Will by her father-in-law, but restricting her right only to have the usufruct and no powers of alienation.

(2.) SARDAR Bahadur Dr. Kartar Singh was owner of a big chunk of property including the property in dispute. He executed a Will in favour of his grandson Daljit Singh and other sons of Ajaib Singh. In this Will, some property was also given to his son Iqbal Singh. However, the said property was to remain with Inder Kaur wife of Iqbal Singh for her residence until her death. The Will of Kartar Singh aforesaid is Ex. PX. Inder Kaur sold the property given to her by Kartar Singh as aforesaid to Gurbachan Kaur and others. This led to the present suit being filed by Paramjit Singh and Gurjit Singh minor sons of Iqbal Singh through their mother Baldev Kaur for declaration that they were owners of the house in dispute and the sale of the same in favour of Gurbachan Kaur was illegal, void and ineffective against their rights. The alleged sale deed by Inder Kaur in favour of Gurbachan Kaur was executed on March 30, 1972. The suit was contested by Inder Kaur inter alia alleging that her husband Iqbal Singh was of un-sound mind. House in dispute was bequeathed to her in lieu of her maintenance. She was in possession of the same at the time of enforcement of Hindu Succession Act. Whatever restricted rights she had, became full and absolute under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. Similar defence was taken by Gurbachan Kaur, the transferee. Necessary issues were framed in the case. The trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated June 26, 1980 decreed the suit. Gurbachan Kaur filed an appeal which was disposed of by the Additional District Judge on October 3, 1983. The appeal was dismissed. The cross objections filed by Baljinder Singh as legal representative of Inder Kaur who had died during the pendency of the suit were, also dismissed. The present appeal has been filed by Gurbachan Kaur and others. On behalf of the plaintiff-respondents, an application has been filed for amendment of the plaint that during pendency of the suit Inder Kaur had died and the suit should be converted for possession as well. The appeal as well as the application are for disposal.

(3.) THERE is no dispute regarding the broad facts as briefly noticed above. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that Inder Kaur became full owner of the property given to her by her father-in-law Kartar Singh and she was competent to alienate the same in favour of Gurbachan Kaur. The interpretation and applicability of Sections 14 (1) and 14 (2) of the Hindu Succession Act was under consideration of the Supreme Court in Gulwant Kaur v. Mohlnder Singh, (1987) 3 Supreme Court cases 674 which decision was subsequently followed in Jaswant Kaur v. Major Harpal Singh, (1989) 3 Supreme Court cases 572. In Gulwant Kaur's ease, the Supreme Court in para 14 of the judgment held as under :