TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether property allotted to a Hindu widow in lieu of maintenance under a pre-Act decree, with restrictions on alienation, falls within Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as enlarged ownership or within Section 14(2) as a restricted estate.
Analysis: The property was given to the widow in recognition of her pre-existing right to maintenance against family property. Such allotment did not create a new title for the first time, but effectuated an antecedent right already recognised by Hindu law. Section 14(1) applies where a female Hindu is possessed of property as a limited owner and enlarges that limited ownership into full ownership. Section 14(2) is a proviso of limited scope and applies only where property is acquired by way of a grant, decree, or instrument conferring a new and independent title with restrictions attached. Property given in lieu of maintenance is expressly within the Explanation to Section 14(1), and restrictions on alienation in the instrument cannot prevent enlargement where the acquisition is referable to a pre-existing right.
Conclusion: The widow was a limited owner in possession of the land under a pre-existing right to maintenance, and Section 14(1) enlarged her interest into full ownership; Section 14(2) did not apply.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
