Source – Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Supreme Court in the matter of M Sivadasan (Dead) through LRs v. A.Soudamini (Dead) through LRs and Ors., has restated that a Hindu female has to be in possession of the property for claiming rights under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act,1956 (HSA).

Background

• For claiming ancestral rights over the property, the appellants had filed a suit for partition and mesne profit before the Trial Court in Kerala.
• The Trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the woman from whom they seek to derive their rights was never in possession of the property and hence Section 14(1) of HSA was not applicable.
• This finding of the Trial Court was upheld by the First Appellate Court and finally by the High Court of Kerala in the second appeal.
• Thereafter, a Special Leave Petition (SLP) was filed before the SC.
• While confirming the decree of the trial court, the SC dismissed the SLP.
• Section 2(12) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) deals with mesne profits.
• It states that mesne profit of property means those profits which the person in wrongful possession of such property actually received or might with ordinary diligence have received therefrom, together with interest on such profits, but shall not include profits due to improvements made by the person in wrongful possession.

Court’s Observations

• The bench comprising Justices CT Ravikumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia observed that Section 14 (1) has no application in this case as the essential ingredient of Section 14 (1) is possession over the property for a Hindu female to claim rights under this section.
• The Court further observed that possession was a pre­requisite to sustain a claim under sub­section (1) of Section 14 of this Act. The Hindu female must not only be possessed of the property, but she must have acquired the property. Such acquisition must be either by way of inheritance or devise, or at a partition or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance or by gift or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription.

Legal Provisions

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956

• It was enacted on 17^th June 1956 for the purpose of amending and codifying the law relating to intestate succession among Hindus.
• The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 amended the provisions on coparcenary property, giving daughters of the deceased equal rights with sons, and subjecting them to the same liabilities.

Section

• Section 14 of HSA deals with the property of a female Hindu considers it as her absolute property. It states that -

(1) 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.

Explanation.—In this sub-section, “property” includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her marriage, or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any such property held by her as Stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act.

(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award where the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a restricted estate in such property.

• In Chaudhary v. Ajudhia (2003), the High Court of Himachal Pradesh held that it is immaterial as to how the female acquired the property and if she possesses any property, the property is considered as her absolute property.