ILLAPAVULURI CHALAPATI RAO Vs. PATCHI GOLLA SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) My learned brother has discussed this case in detail and I have only to say that I agree with the conclusion to which he has come. The whole controversy arises with regard to the use of the word " hukkudharulu " and whether that word is such a word of amplitude as can without more confer upon a Hindu female an absolute estate. There is of course no reason why if suitable words are used a Hindu female should not take as large an estate as a Hindu male under a will but if no such words of sufficient amplitude are used, then one has to apply the ordinary Hindu notions as to what quantum of estate a Hindu female takes. Hukkudharulu has been finally translated as " the person who has the right " which of course is for our purpose somewhat ambiguous. But it is, however, stated in the judgments what the word actually means and one would have thought that if the word in the Andhra country had been in common use to connote an absolute right then both the District Munsif and the Subordinate Judge would have said something to that effect. But as pointed out by my learned brother they have abstained from doing so. There is nothing from the further contents of the will from which we can gather that the testator intended his fourth wife to have anything larger than a woman's estate because his bequest of the decree amounts would not necessarily give her the same estate in them as in the immovable property. With the best consideration I can give to the matter I agree with the judgment just delivered by my learned brother and only add these few words of my own in deference to the three judgments which have been already pronounced on the matter and with which we are now disagreeing. The decree will be reversed and the appeal remanded to the Subordinate Judge for decision on issues 1, 2 and 3. Appellant will have his costs throughout. Court-fee will be refunded. Jackson, J.

(2.) The sole point for consideration in this appeal is the interpretation of the will Ex. J. It is styled a will (sic); para. 2 sets forth the reasons for the testator having divided from his younger brother, and concludes: Inasmuch as this property has come to ma by virtue of partition, neither my younger brother nor any other heir shall have any manner of right. He has no rights to my property nor have I any to his. My wife Seshamma is the only one entitled and none else.

(3.) Paragraph 3 sets forth that the third wife owing to unchastity has no right.