KANHAIYA LAL Vs. MTGAURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question which arises in this appeal is whether a grandmother gets a share in the family property on a partition between her grandsons only. One Nainsukh Das was the owner of the property in question. On his death ho left a widow Mt. Gaura, defendant, and a son Chunni Lal. Chunni Lal has since died leaving a widow. Mt. Har Kuar, and two sons, Kanhaiya Lal and Makhan Lal. The point for consideration is whether in a partition between Kanhaiya Lai and Makhan Lal, Mt. Gaura gets any share in the property which originally belonged to her deceased husband Nainsukh Das.

(2.) The trial Court, as well as the lower appellate Court, came to the conclusion that she was entitled to a share under the Mitakshara law. That view has been affirmed by a learned Judge of this Court, who himself is well acquainted with the provisions of the Hindu Law.

(3.) The question raised in this appeal is however not a very easy one to decide, and it is therefore) necessary to consider the authorities in some detail.