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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether property allotted to a Hindu widow in lieu of maintenance under a compromise, despite a restriction on alienation, fell under section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 or section 14(2), and whether her right to maintenance was a pre-existing right.
Analysis: The widow's right to maintenance was held to be a tangible pre-existing right against property under Shastric Hindu law, capable of enforcement through a charge and not merely a fresh grant created for the first time by the compromise. Section 14(1) was construed broadly to enlarge the estate of a female Hindu in possession of property, including property received in lieu of maintenance, while section 14(2) was treated as a narrow proviso confined to grants or instruments that create a new title for the first time. A restrictive recital in the compromise was held to be only a recognition of the legal position then prevailing and not a condition defeating the operation of section 14(1).
Conclusion: The property allotted in lieu of maintenance was governed by section 14(1), not section 14(2), and the widow became full owner notwithstanding the restriction in the compromise.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a Hindu female acquires property in recognition or satisfaction of a pre-existing right to maintenance, any restriction in the instrument does not attract section 14(2) and her limited estate is enlarged into absolute ownership under section 14(1) if she is in possession when the Act comes into force.