9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of the term "son" and "daughter" in Section 15(1)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act.
Summary: The judgment involved a case where two sisters, with a common father but different mothers, were in dispute over inheritance rights. The appellant claimed a share in the estate of her deceased father and step-mother based on Section 15(1)(a) of the Act. The High Court denied her claim, citing conflicting interpretations by different High Courts. The Supreme Court deliberated on whether the terms "son" and "daughter" in the Act included step-children or only biological children. The court highlighted the need for legislative clarity to resolve such conflicts and prevent further litigation. The judgment emphasized the importance of promoting reconciliation and resolving disputes amicably, especially between close relatives. The parties reached a compromise where the respondent agreed to pay a sum of money and transfer certain properties to the appellant. The court directed the terms of the compromise to be implemented, ensuring a fair distribution of assets. It was noted that the remaining properties would belong solely to the respondent, settling all claims from the appellant regarding the estate. In conclusion, the appeal was allowed in part based on the compromise reached by the parties, which was deemed reasonable and just. The judgment highlighted the significance of finding common ground and fostering unity in legal proceedings, setting a positive example for future cases involving family disputes. The decree was made without costs, and a call was made for Parliament to clarify its intention regarding Section 15(1)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act.
|
