DINDYAL & ANR. versus RAJARAM

DINDYAL & ANR. versus RAJARAM

A Hindu woman who re-occupies property as a trespasser after gifting under a valid gift does not reacquire ownership under s. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act as she is not in 'possession' with a right to the property; adverse possession by a trespasser does not substitute for that right, and reversioners' rights accrue only after the widow's death and are thus not affected by earlier limitation bars under tenancy or limitation statutes.

Parties
Appellant: Dindayal; Appellant: Prameshwar Dayal; Respondent: Rajaram
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 April 1970
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated September 28, 1966 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Second Appeal No. 938 of 1965
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Section 14, Adverse Possession, Rights of Reversioner, Tenancy Rights Extinguishment
Hindu Law Property Law Tenancy Law Limitation Law Hindu Succession Act, 1956 Section 14 Adverse Possession Rights of Reversioner Tenancy Rights Extinguishment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dindayal

Appellant

Prameshwar Dayal

Appellant

Rajaram

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated September 28, 1966 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Second Appeal No. 938 of 1965

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Hindu widow who reacquired possession of property after gifting it could claim full ownership under s. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 after dispossessing the donee's heirs as a trespasser.
  2. 2 Whether Article 1 of the Second Schedule read with s. 104(1) of the C.P. Tenancy Act, 1920 applies to a suit by a reversioner for possession.

Ratio Decidendi

A Hindu woman who re-occupies property as a trespasser after gifting under a valid gift does not reacquire ownership under s. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act as she is not in 'possession' with a right to the property; adverse possession by a trespasser does not substitute for that right, and reversioners' rights accrue only after the widow's death and are thus not affected by earlier limitation bars under tenancy or limitation statutes.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Correction ordered to substitute Rajaram as plaintiff wherever 'plaintiffs' appeared.
  • Mesne profits deposited by appellants to be paid to respondent Rajaram.