GAGAN SINGH Vs. MANGOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to the present appeal are that Smt. Leela, Defendant No. 6, was the wife of one Situ. Situ was having three other brothers, namely, Sardaroo, Mangu and Biru. After the death of Situ who died in the year 1948 issueless, his widow Smt. Leela, Defendant No. 6, survived him. After the death of Situ, Smt. Leela married Sardaru, the younger brother of Situ. This marriage took place much prior to the coming into force of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 . The property inherited by Leela from her previous husband Situ was the subject -matter of the suit. Out of this subject -matter of the suit, 32 Kanals 14 marlas of land as detailed in the plaint, was gifted by Leela in favour of her sons -Defendants 1 to 5 born out of the loins of her second husband Sardaru. According to Plaintiffs, on re -marriage, Leela forfeited her right to inherit the property of her original husband, therefore, she had no authority to transfer the land through gift deed in favour of her sons. According to Plaintiffs, on her re -marriage, whatever she inherited, reverted to Plaintiffs and other brothers of Situ and Plaintiffs claimed themselves to be in exclusive possession of land measuring 130 kanals, 18 marlas, out of 394 kanals, 4 marlas as detailed in the plaint which included the gifted land also.

(2.) THE Defendants contested the suit and took various preliminary objections in their written statement. On merit, it was very specifically pleaded that on the basis of the custom, prevailing in the illaqua by which the parties were governed, a widow, on remarriage, did not forfeit her right in the property inherited by her from her husband on her re -marriage, in case the re -marriage was in the same family. The gift has been alleged to be a valid one and in accordance with law. The other averments in the plaint were not admitted.

(3.) THE Trial Court came to the conclusion that Leela Defendant No. 6 had married Sardaru, the younger brother of Situ much prior to coming into being of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and she never became full owner of the suit property. The Trial Court also came to the conclusion that Leela had married Sardaru before 1950. It was also held by the Trial Court that there existed a custom that when a widow re -married the younger or elder brother of her deceased husband, then she did not forfeit her estate which had come to her as a limited owner from her deceased husband. It was also held that Leela continued to remain a limited owner till 1956 and in that year, she became the full owner of the suit land and she had every right to alienate the land by way of gift in favour of her sons begotten through the loins of Sardaru. The suit of the Plaintiffs was dismissed.