VENKARADDI MARDEPPA LINGDAL Vs. HANMANTGOWDA RAMANGOWDA KULKARNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This was a suit brought by the plaintiff for a declaration that the deed of gift passed by his wife Tulsava in favour of the defendant, her brother, was invalid as it was passed by her without the consent of the plaintiff, her husband.

(2.) The property in suit was bequeathed in 1907 by the maternal grandfather to the plaintiff's wife Tulsava, who passed a deed of gift in 1926 in respect thereof in favour of her brother, the defendant. According to the finding of the lower Court, which we think is correct, the plaintiff and his wife did not live together ever since they were married. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the property which came to the plaintiff's wife was saudayika stridhan, and therefore, she was competent to make a gift in favour of her brother without the consent of her husband. In the alternative he held that even if it were not saudayika stridhan, she was competent to alienate it as she had been abandoned by her husband and was not under coverture, and relied on the decision in the case of Bhagvanlal V/s. Bai Divali .

(3.) The question, therefore, in this appeal is whether the property which the plaintiff's wife obtained by bequest from her maternal grandfather is saudayika stridhan according to Hindu law. According to the decision in Bhau V/s. Raghunath (1905) I.L.R. 30 Bom. 229, Saudayika stridhan is that which is obtained by a married woman or by a virgin in the house of her husband or of her father, from her brother or parents. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that this being a bequest from the maternal grandfather, it is not obtained from her brother or her parents and therefore it is not saudayika stridhan. The dictionary meaning of saudayika is " whatever is given to a woman at her marriage by her parents, or a relative in general, which becomes her own property."