JHABUMAHTO Vs. SHANKAR MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the widow's right for maintenance in an earlier compromise decree prior to the enforcement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (for short the Act) would operate as res judicata after the Act was enforced, and whether an earlier life estate of a widow would blossom into full ownership in view of section 14 of the Act, are short but significant questions of law for determination in the present Defendants' Second Appeal preferred under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short the Code) in a suit for declaration of rights over Schedules A & B properties and for partition of half snare over Schedules C & D properties.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff as set up in the plaint is that the plaintiff is adopted son of Smt. Khudi Mahtain. One Guhi Mahto and Thakur Mahto were two brothers. Thakur Mahto died leaving behind his widow Khudi Mahtain, who inherited the properties left by her husband and continued in possession till enforcement of the Act. As the present defendants-appellants were interfering with her possession she filed a suit No. 60 or 1945, in which compromise was arrived at on 15-10-1946 that she would be entitled only to a right of maintenance. But on the enforcement of the Act in view of section 14 thereof she became absolute owner and the compromise decree giving her right to maintenance only would not operate as res judicata or even as estoppel. Smt. Khudi Mahtain adopted the plaintiff-respondent as her son and deed of adoption was also executed and registered, but as the defendants-appellants were trying to create trouble on the basis of the compromise decree, hence the necessity arose to file the instant suit.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants-appellants denying the plaint allegation and alleged that Smt. Khudi Mahtain was only entitled to life estate or maintenance and she cannot become the absolute owner and the adoption deed was illegally executed and the suit was liable to be dismissed.