9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the widow of a pre-deceased son can claim maintenance from her brother-in-law who inherited the self-acquired property of their father. 2. Whether the self-acquired property of the father can be considered ancestral property in the hands of the inheriting son for the purposes of the widow's maintenance claim. 3. Whether the moral obligation of the father to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law becomes a legal obligation enforceable against the son who inherits the father's self-acquired property. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Claim of Maintenance by Widow of Pre-deceased Son: The plaintiff, the widow of Ghasi Ram, sought maintenance from her brother-in-law, Nand Ram, who inherited the property of their father, Khiali Ram. The courts below had dismissed the suit, holding that the property was self-acquired by Khiali Ram and thus not liable for the plaintiff's maintenance. The plaintiff contended that despite the property being self-acquired, it became ancestral upon Khiali Ram's death and should be liable for her maintenance. The court examined precedents, including Adhibai v. Cursandas Nathu, which supported the widow's claim for maintenance even from self-acquired property inherited by the brother-in-law. The court concluded that the widow's right to maintenance does not depend solely on the property being ancestral but also on the moral obligation of the father, which transforms into a legal obligation upon inheritance by the son. 2. Classification of Self-Acquired Property as Ancestral: The court analyzed whether the self-acquired property of Khiali Ram could be treated as ancestral in the hands of Nand Ram. It was clarified that during Khiali Ram's lifetime, the property was self-acquired and not ancestral. The court referred to various judgments and legal texts, concluding that the property does not become ancestral merely by inheritance. The term "ancestral property" was distinguished in the context of the rights of the widow, noting that the property remained self-acquired and did not confer any coparcenary rights to the plaintiff's husband, Ghasi Ram, during Khiali Ram's lifetime. 3. Transformation of Moral Obligation into Legal Obligation: The court extensively discussed the moral obligation of a Hindu father to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law and how this obligation becomes a legal duty for the son who inherits the father's property. References were made to Hindu law texts and previous judgments, emphasizing that the son's inheritance is subject to the moral obligations of the father, which include maintaining the widowed daughter-in-law. The court cited the principle that the heir takes the property for the spiritual benefit of the deceased and must fulfill the deceased's moral obligations. This view was supported by various authorities, including the judgments in Rajjomeney Dossee v. Shibehunder Mullick and Khetramani Dasi v. Kashinath Das. Conclusion: The court allowed the appeal, holding that the plaintiff's claim for maintenance was valid. The case was remanded to the lower appellate court for further adjudication on the merits of the other pleas set up by the defendants. The decision established that the moral obligation of a father to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law does indeed transform into a legal obligation enforceable against the son who inherits the father's self-acquired property. The costs were ordered to abide by the result of the remanded proceedings.
|
