TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband devolves, on her dying intestate without issue, on the heirs of the husband under Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or escheats to the Government under Section 29 of that Act. (ii) Whether the High Court could decree possession against the mortgagee defendants when the question of subsistence of the mortgage and the right of redemption had been expressly left open.
Issue (i): Whether property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband devolves, on her dying intestate without issue, on the heirs of the husband under Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or escheats to the Government under Section 29 of that Act.
Analysis: Section 15(1) sets out the general order of succession to the property of a female Hindu dying intestate, and Section 15(2)(b) carves out an exception for property inherited from the husband or father-in-law by directing that such property devolves, in the absence of issue, upon the heirs of the husband. Section 16 regulates the order among those heirs by applying the rules that would have governed the husband had he died intestate immediately after the female intestate. Section 29 operates only where there is a complete failure of heirs. The property of a female Hindu does not escheat so long as any heir is available under Section 15(1) or Section 15(2). The restrictive view that Section 15(2) excludes the other heirs altogether was rejected.
Conclusion: The property did not escheat to the Government; it devolved in the manner provided by Section 15(2), and the State's claim failed.
Issue (ii): Whether the High Court could decree possession against the mortgagee defendants when the question of subsistence of the mortgage and the right of redemption had been expressly left open.
Analysis: The right to redeem the mortgage had not been adjudicated by the trial court and, by agreement, the question had been left open. In these circumstances, the High Court could not properly decree the suit against the mortgagee defendants on that unresolved question.
Conclusion: The decree against the mortgagee defendants could not stand and was set aside.
Final Conclusion: The statutory scheme of succession to a female Hindu's property was held to preserve succession through the heirs identified by the Act and to exclude escheat to the Government unless there is a total failure of heirs; the decree against the mortgagee defendants was also invalid because the mortgage issue remained undecided.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 governs the devolution of property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband and does not exclude succession by the heirs of the husband where such heirs exist; escheat under Section 29 arises only on a complete failure of heirs.
TaxTMI 
