1987 (10) TMI 384 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of a compromise decree regarding a gift deed made by a limited owner, effect of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 on property rights, validity of a will executed post the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute over a gift deed made by Mst. Sheru @ Bhushehari, a limited owner of certain properties, in favor of Shri Dhari. The compromise decree passed in 1950 declared the gift ineffective and stated that the properties would be divided equally after Mst. Sheru's death, with Shri Dhari giving a share to Shri Hari Ram. However, with the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Mst. Sheru became the absolute owner of all her properties, including those subject to the gift deed.

The High Court held that the gift was ineffective and that Mst. Sheru continued to be a limited owner until her death in 1960. The Court reasoned that the compromise decree intended for the gift to be operative only until Mst. Sheru's lifetime, preserving her limited ownership rights. As per Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a female Hindu could transfer property by Will, and since Mst. Sheru executed a will in 1959, she had the capacity to dispose of her properties.

The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court's interpretation, emphasizing that the compromise decree clearly rendered the gift ineffective, maintaining Mst. Sheru's limited ownership until 1956. The Court also cited a previous judgment to distinguish cases where reversioners challenge alienations by widows before the Hindu Succession Act. In this case, the Court upheld the validity of the will executed by Mst. Sheru and recognized the appellants as legitimate legatees.

Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment. The Court held that Mst. Sheru had the right to dispose of the property through her will, given her absolute ownership post the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Each party was directed to bear their own costs in the matter.