Mst. Mohindero vs Kartar Singh And Ors on 30 October, 1990

           PETITIONER:
MST. MOHINDERO

	Vs.

RESPONDENT:
KARTAR SINGH AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT30/10/1990

BENCH:
KULDIP SINGH (J)
BENCH:
KULDIP SINGH (J)
AGRAWAL, S.C. (J)

CITATION:
 1991 AIR  257		  1990 SCR  Supl. (2) 475
 1991 SCC  Supl.  (2) 605 JT 1990 (4)	265
 1990 SCALE  (2)853


ACT:
    Hindu Succession Act, 1956--Section 15(1)(a)--Succession
to   estate  of	 Hindu	widow--Daughter	 of   the   deceased
son--Preferential heir--Entitled to succession.



HEADNOTE:
    Santi married Kisso and gave birth to a son, the  father
of  the appellant. On the death of Kisso, Santi married	 his
brother, Ditto, who died issueless.
    On	the death of Ditto, the mutation of his	 estate	 was
sanctioned  in	Santi's name, being his widow.	She  was  in
possession of the same as life-Estate holder. She executed a
gift-deed in favour of her grand daughter, the appellant  on
December 27, 1955 and she died on October 6, 1956, after the
commencement of the Hindu Succession Act.
    Kissi,  the sister of Santi's husbands flied a suit	 for
possession  contending that she was a preferential  heir  of
the suit property, and that the property had been  illegally
mutated in the name of the appellant.
    The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that  without
challenging  the gift deed, the suit for possession was	 not
competent.
    Meanwhile  Kissi, the plaintiff, having died, her  heirs
the  respondents  preferred an appeal  before  the  District
Judge.	An application to amend the plaint, so as  to  chal-
lenge the validity of the gift was also flied. The  District
Judge  allowed the application and the appeal, and  remanded
the case for fresh trial.
    Holding  the  gift to be invalid, the Trial	 Court	dis-
missed	the  suit  on the ground of  limitation,  which	 was
affirmed by the District Judge, in appeal.
    The	 Respondents' Second Appeal to the High	 Court,	 was
allowed	 by a Single Judge who reversed the findings of	 the
Courts below on the issue of limitation.
476
    The Letters Patent Appeal against the aforesaid judgment
was dismissed.
    The appellant in this Court has contended that the	gift
being  invalid,	 Santi,	 the grandmother  of  the  appellant
continued  to be a limited owner till the date of  the	com-
mencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and  thereafter
by  virtue  of the provisions of the Act,  she	became	full
owner  of  the	suit-property and the  appellant  being	 the
daughter of a predeceased son of Santi was the	preferential
heir  under section 15(1)(a) of the Act and was entitled  to
succeed	 to  the  property. The	 respondents  contended	 the
appeal	contending that unless it was factually proved	that
appellant's father was the son of Santi, the appellant could
not get the benefit of section 15 of the Act.
Allowing the appeal, this Court.
    HELD:  1. The appellant being daughter of a	 predeceased
son  was  entitled to succeed to the property  of  Santi  in
preference to the respondents-plaintiffs. [479D]
    2.	Santi  held the property as limited owner  till	 the
coming into force of the Act. She became full owner thereaf-
ter.  When  she died on October 6, 1956	 succession  to	 her
property  was to be governed by the Act. Santi	having	died
intestate, succession to her property was to be governed  by
Section 15 read with Section 16 of the Act. Appellant  being
the daughter of a predeceased son of Santi she had the first
preference  to	succeed under Section 15(1)(a) of  the	Act.
[479B-C]
    This  Court found sufficient material on the  record  to
prove  that  the appellant's father was the  son  of  Santi.
[479B]



JUDGMENT: