LAWS(PVC)-1923-12-20

RUKMANI AMMAL Vs. NARASIMHACHARIAR

Decided On December 07, 1923
RUKMANI AMMAL Appellant
V/S
NARASIMHACHARIAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for decision is as to the proper construction of a partition deed executed by two step-sisters. They inherited the properties of their father after the death of his widow. The moveable properties they divided without a deed and the immoveable by the deed in question nine years after, one of them, Janaki by name, died leaving a will in favour of the plaintiff. The will is disputed by the other sister who claims the property by right of survivorship. The partition deed is Ex. A It refers to the fact that the moveable properties had already been divided, allots a decree to one sister and an usufructuary mortgage to the other and divides the immoveable properties between them. It closes with the sentence " Henceforth the only relationship between us will be one of friendship and not of property." The question is whether they intended by this expression to exclude the right of succession by survivorship. It is argued that their intention was merely to give up their present and not their future rights.

(2.) The phrase used in Ex. A is sometimes to be found in deeds of partition between males. In such cases there is no question of right of survivorship and the phrase would seem to carry no special significance. In a case like this, however, there is a question of a right of survivorship and the phrase might well have been intended to carry a special significance.

(3.) Several rulings have been cited. The first is Muttu Vaduganadha Tevar V/s. Dora Singha Thevar ILR 3 M 290. A partition deed was relied on in which occurred precisely the same phrase as is now under consideration. The finding was (vide page 339) that the right renounced in the partition deed was absolutely different from the right in contest in the subsequent litigation. The decision does not, 1 think, help the appellant. Here each sister renounced " henceforth " all right to the other's share and they cannot but have had in contemplation the certainty that one of them would predecease the other.