9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (4) TMI 924 - SC - Indian LawsWhether the deceased Mr. M.K. Govinda Singh died intestate? Whether the suit for partition by the daughters of the deceased M.K. Govinda Singh, who died intestate, is maintainable or not? Whether the alleged will dated 29.11.1995 said to have been executed is genuine one and, if so, who are the beneficiaries? Whether the D-4 is entitled to have any share in the schedule property? If so what is his share? Whether the Will of Late M.K. Govinda Singh is true, valid and genuine?
Issues Involved:
1. Effect of the amendment in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, specifically the omission of Section 23. 2. Validity and genuineness of the Will dated 29.11.1995 purportedly executed by Govinda Singh. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Effect of the Amendment in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005: The core issue was whether the omission of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by the 2005 Amendment Act had a retrospective or prospective effect. The property in question belonged to Govinda Singh, who died intestate according to the plaintiffs, leading to a suit for partition filed on 11.03.1996. The appellant contended that the suit for partition was not maintainable due to Section 23 of the Act, which restricted daughters from claiming partition of a dwelling house unless the male heirs chose to divide their shares. The High Court held that the omission of Section 23 during the pendency of the appeal allowed the daughters to seek partition. The Supreme Court examined the legislative intent behind the 2005 Amendment, noting that the amendment aimed to remove gender discrimination and confer equal rights to female heirs. The Court opined that Section 23, which restricted daughters' rights, was a disabling provision and its removal should be applied prospectively. The Court acknowledged that although the amendment was prospective, it affected pending proceedings. The right to claim partition by female heirs was no longer restricted, and the restriction imposed by Section 23 was removed. The Court held that the daughters had an absolute right to maintain a suit for partition, and the omission of Section 23 applied to ongoing cases. 2. Validity and Genuineness of the Will Dated 29.11.1995: The appellant claimed that the suit property was bequeathed to him through a Will executed by Govinda Singh on 29.11.1995. The plaintiffs challenged the genuineness of the Will, leading to testamentary proceedings. The learned Single Judge and the Division Bench found several suspicious circumstances surrounding the Will, including inconsistencies in the evidence of witnesses and the manner of execution. The Court scrutinized the evidence, noting contradictions in the testimonies of witnesses, particularly regarding the preparation and attestation of the Will. The Court highlighted that the Will was allegedly typed by a typist in the corridors of the High Court, and the instructions for the Will were not retained. The affidavit supporting the Will was drafted in English, despite the testator's preference for Tamil, and the stamp paper for the affidavit was purchased from a distant location. The Court concluded that the appellant failed to prove the due execution of the Will, affirming the findings of the lower courts. The Will was deemed not validly executed due to the suspicious circumstances and inconsistencies in the evidence. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's judgment. The Court affirmed that the omission of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act allowed the daughters to seek partition, and the Will purportedly executed by Govinda Singh was not validly proved. The judgment emphasized the legislative intent to remove gender discrimination and ensure equal rights for female heirs in matters of succession and inheritance.
|
