{"id":5456,"date":"1970-12-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1970-12-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970"},"modified":"2018-01-21T15:45:34","modified_gmt":"2018-01-21T10:15:34","slug":"pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","title":{"rendered":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: AIR 1971 Bom 413, (1971) 73 BOMLR 402<\/div>\n
Author: Chandrachud<\/div>\n
Bench: Chandrachud, Malvankar<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
  Chandrachud, J.   <\/p>\n
 1.  Two important questions arise in this appeal : (1) Whether Section 2 of the Hindu Widows’ Re-marriage Act, 1856 (Act XV of 1856) hereinafter called “the Act of 1856” is restricted in its application to property in which Hindu widows have a limited estate and (2) whether Section 2 of the Act of 1856 is inconsistent with Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession, Act, 1956 (Act XXX of 1956) hereinafter called “the Act of 1956”.\n<\/p>\n
 2. One Bhika Shirke died on the 13th of June 1956 leaving behind him his daughter Sindhu, who is the plaintiff and his widow Chandrabhaga, the 2nd defendant. On the 17th of June 1956, the Act of 1956 came into force. In October 1956, Chandrabhaga remarried. On the 16th of December 1958, she sold to the 1st defendant the property which she had inherited from her husband and of which she was possessed.\n<\/p>\n
 3. Sindhu filed the present suit in 1960 for possession of that property on the ground that her mother had forfeited her interest in it on the date of her re-marriage in 1956 and therefore, she had no right to sell the property to the 1st defendant.\n<\/p>\n
 4. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the 2nd defendant did not forfeit her interest in her husband’s property on account of her re-marriage and, therefore, she could pass a valid title to the 1st defendant. The appeal filed by the plaintiff against that decision was allowed by the learned Assistant Judge, Poona, who held that the second defendant forfeited her right to her husband’s property on her remarriage and that the alienation effected by her in favour of the 1st defendant was therefore void.\n<\/p>\n
 5. The 1st defendant has filed this appeal against that decree. The appeal came up for hearing before Vaidya, J., on the 31st of July 1970. As it involves important Questions of law on which there could be a difference of opinion, the learned Judge referred the appeal to a Division Bench.\n<\/p>\n
 6. The first question which falls for decision is whether Section 2 of the Act of 1856 governs only limited estates held by widows or whether it applies to properties held by them absolutely also. The section reads as follows:–\n<\/p>\n
  “All rights and interests which any widow may have in her deceased husband’s property by way of maintenance, or by inheritance to her husband or to his lineal successors, or by virtue of any will or testamentary disposition conferring upon her, without express permission to re-marry, only a limited interest in such property, with no power of alienating the same, shall upon her remarriage cease and determine as if she had then died; and the next heirs of her deceased husband, or other persons entitled to the property on her death, shall thereupon succeed to the same”.\n<\/p>\n
 7. It is clear that Section 2 governs (1) all rights and interests which a Hindu widow may have in her deceased husband’s property by way of maintenance, (2) all rights and interests which she may have in her deceased husband’s property by inheritance to him or to his lineal successors and (3) all rights and interests which she may have in her deceased husband’s property by virtue of any will or testamentary disposition conferring upon her, without express permission to remarry, only a limited interest in such property with no power of alienating the same. The section provides that the rights and interests of a Hindu widow in these three classes of properties shall cease upon her re-marriage and shall determine as if she had then died. As a consequence of this cessation of interest and the fictional death of the widow, the next heirs of her deceased husband or other persons entitled to the property on her<\/p>\n
death   become    entitled    to    succeed    to that property.\n<\/p>\n
 8. Out of the three classes of property on which Section 2 operates, the first and third are limited interests –the former by necessary implication and the latter in terms. The interest of a Hindu widow in her husband’s property by way of maintenance was always in the nature of a limited interest prior to the enactment of the Act of 1956. The third class of property on which Section 2 operates is in terms described as “an interest which a widow obtains under a will which confers a limited interest on her, without express permission to re-marry and with no power of alienating the same”.\n<\/p>\n
 9.       What  has therefore to  be   determined   is   whether   the    second    category of property    on which    Section  2 perates is the interest known to Hindu aw as the “limited estate” of a Hindu widow   or  whether  it   also   covers   property of which she is a full or absolute owner.    Now it is  true  that  the particular clause  of Section  2  which  relates to   property  which   she   gets   by   inheritance   to   her   husband   or   to   his   lineal successors is  not  qualified by words of limitation indicating that the inheritance should  be   in  the   nature   of  a  limited estate.     The    reason,  however,    why   a limiting   phrase   which   occurs in  regard to the third  category of property   does not occur in regard to the first two categories    is    that    prior    to    the    Act    of 1956, the interest of a Hindu widow in her husband’s property by way of maintenance and her interest in property to which she succeeded as a Hindu widow was   always  in   the   nature   of  a   limited estate.    The  Hindu  Womens’   Rights   to Property Act, 1937 enlarged the interest of a Hindu widow in her husband’s property  to  some  extent,  but  that  enlargement  was quantitative  and not  qualitative.    Under  Sub-sections   (1) and   (2)  of Section   3  of that Act,  she acquired  an interest    which    she    did    not    formerly possess but under Sub-section (3) she got it as  “the limited interest known as   a Hindu Women’s estate”.    When the Act of 1856 was passed, it was therefore unnecessary   to   qualify   the   second   clause of  Section 2, any   more   than   its   first clause, by    words    indicating    expressly that    the    provision    was    intended    to apply   to   such   property  only   as   was held   by   Hindu     widows     as   a   limited estate.    Inheritance     necessarily    meant inheritance   in   the  nature   of   a  limited estate.\n<\/p>\n
 10. In our opinion, therefore, every one of the three limbs of Section 2 of the Act of 1856 applies to limited estates only in the hands of Hindu widows. Section 2 has no ap
\nplication  to  property held  by   a   Hindu widow as a full or absolute owner.\n<\/p>\n
 11. This question has come before the High Courts in many cases and the view taken therein is similar to the one which we have taken. In Bangaru Reddi v. Mangammal. AIR 1947 Mad 163, Rajamannar, J., held that S. 2 of the Act of 1856 has no effect on property belonging to the Hindu widow absolutely on the date of her re-marriage. According to the learned Judge the words “as if she had then died” supply the criterion for adjudicating on the rights and disabilities of the widow on her re-marriage. “All the results which would follow on the remarriage are results which would ensue if she had died on the date of the remarriage. In other words, if she had only a limited and life interest then that would cease; but if she had an absolute estate that would not cease”.\n<\/p>\n
 12. A similar view was taken by Subba Rao, J. (as he then was) in Lakshmi Ammal v. Thangavel Asari. . The learned Judge held that a combined reading of Sections 2 and 5 of the Act of 1856 indicates that the forfeiture of property by a Hindu widow on re-marriage is confined to the category of cases specified in Section 2 and that the section applies to limited estates only. “The section will not apply to an absolute interest legally acquired by the widow”. This decision was affirmed by a Division Bench in a Letters Patent Appeal (Thangavelu Asari v. Lakshmi Ammal, ). It was held that it is only when the widow is in enjoyment of rights and interests of a limited amplitute that Section 2 can apply and that “there is a clear indication in the provisions of the section that any property to which the widow may become entitled absolutely will not be forfeited on her remarriage.”\n<\/p>\n
 13. The judgment in Ballabha Pani_v. Jasodhara Pani, ILR (1965) Cut 398 is even more directly in point. In that case, a Hindu widow obtained a decree for a declaration of her title and for possession of property belonging to her husband. She remarried after the preliminary decree was passed and when she filed an application for making that decree final, the judgment-debtors objected that she had forfeited her right to the property of her husband and therefore, she could not maintain the final decree proceedings. The learned Single Judge of the Orissa High Court rejected this contention on the ground that Section 2 of the Act of 1856 “has no application to the properties in which the widow has acquired an absolute interest on the date of her remarriage”.\n<\/p>\n
 14. On the first question, we are, therefore, of the view that Section 2 of the Act of 1856 applies only to limited estates of Hindu widows and that it cannot operate on property of which they are full or absolute owners.\n<\/p>\n
 15. In view of this conclusion, the second question does not really arise because that question assumes that there is an inconsistency between Section 2 of the Act of 1856 and Section 14(1) of the Act of 1956 under, which “Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner”. There is therefore no scope for applying the provision contained in Section 4 (1) (b) of the Act of 1956 which says that save as otherwise expressly provided in the Act, any law in force immediately before the commencement of the Act “shall cease to apply to Hindus in so far as it is inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in this Act”.\n<\/p>\n
 16. Mr. Oak, appearing for the respondent, says that even if Section 2 of the Act of 1856 were to operate on property held by a Hindu widow as a full owner, there would be no inconsistency between it and Section 14(1) of the Act of 1956 because even if the widow would forfeit her interest in that property on her remarriage, she would still form a fresh stock of descent under Section 15 (1) of the Act of 1956 and therefore, an essential attribute of her full ownership in her husband’s property shall have been preserved. Strictly, it is unnecessary to consider this argument because we have taken the view that Section 2 does not operate on property held by a Hindu widow as a full owner. But we would like to say that the argument is unsustainable. In<\/p>\n
the first place, Section 15 (1) of the Act
\nof 1956 would have no application because if on re-marriage the widow forfeited her interest in her husband’s property, that property would cease to be hers and the rules of devolution laid down in Section 15 could not be invoked so as to treat her as a fresh stock of descent. Secondly, if Section 2 operated on full ownership also, the widow would forfeit her right to deal with property of which she is an absolute owner, which would mean destroying an important attribute of full ownership. Full ownership connotes a free right of disposal. Therefore, if Section 2 of the Act of 1856 were to be construed so as to govern property of which the Hindu widow is a full owner, there would be a fundamental inconsistency between it and Section 14 (1) of the Act of 1956. In that event. Section 4 (1) (b) of the latter Act would have come into play. As observed by the Supreme Court in Punithavalli Ammal v. Ramlingam,  the rights conferred on a Hindu female under Section 14 (1) of the Act of 1956 constitute a clear departure from the Hindu law, texts or rules and that from a plain reading of that section it is clear that the estate taken by a Hindu female under it is an absolute one and is not defeasible under any circumstances. “The ambit of that estate cannot be cut by any text, rule or interpretation of Hindu law”.\n<\/p>\n
 17. For these reasons, we allow the appeal, set aside the decree passed by the learned Assistant Judge and restore that of the trial Court. The plaintiff’s suit will stand dismissed but in the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
 18. Appeal allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 Equivalent citations: AIR 1971 Bom 413, (1971) 73 BOMLR 402 Author: Chandrachud Bench: Chandrachud, Malvankar JUDGMENT Chandrachud, J. 1. Two important questions arise in this appeal : (1) Whether Section 2 of the Hindu Widows’ Re-marriage Act, 1856 (Act XV of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5456","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970\",\"datePublished\":\"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\"},\"wordCount\":2082,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\",\"name\":\"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970","datePublished":"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970"},"wordCount":2082,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970","name":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1970-12-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-21T10:15:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandurang-narayan-salunke-vs-sindhu-and-anr-on-4-december-1970#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pandurang Narayan Salunke vs Sindhu And Anr. on 4 December, 1970"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5456","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5456"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5456\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5456"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5456"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5456"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}