Hindu Widow’s Remarriage Act, 1856 – s. 2 – Rights of widow in deceased husband’s property to cease on remarriage – Wife contracted a second marriage after the death of the first husband – Son born from the second marriage filed suit for partition claiming the share in the suit property vested in his mother from her first husband – Son born from the first marriage impleaded as defendants – Trial court allowed the claim for partition – However, the first appellate court dismissed the suit for partition – In appeal, the High Court restored the trial court’s judgment and decree – Correctness: Held: On remarriage of wife, after the death of her first husband, her title or interest over the suit property stood lapsed in terms of s. 2 – Thus, wife’s right to deal with property derived from her first husband stood extinguished as regards the deed of 1910 – However, it was not wife alone who had executed that instrument, it was her mother-in-law and her son, from first marrige who had executed it and remained valid legal heirs of the first husband (since deceased) – Wife could not convey any property over which she did not have any right or title – Her right, if any, would stem from the second deed of lease – No claim was made before any forum for invalidating the deed of 1910 – However, in absence of proper title over the subject property, that lease deed even if she was its sole lessor would not have had been legally valid or enforceable – Son from second marriage, respresented through his successors, sought to claim his share of suit property through the mother – But the mother had lost her right over the subject property on her contracting second marriage – Her status over the said property, post-1910 if at all was that of lessee – No indication in any of the deeds that the said lease could travel beyond the stipulated term of twelve years – Ownership of the suit property could not be said to have devolved in any manner whatsoever to the son from her second husband – Thus, the decision of the High Court set aside and that of the first appellate court dismissing the suit for partition is confirmed. [Paras 17-19]
Title – Title to a document – Deed of conveyance – Conveyer not having the title over the property – Legal right of successorsin-interest on the property: Held: If right, title or interest in certain property is sought conveyed by a person by an instrument who herself does not possess any such form of entitlement on the subject being conveyed, even with a subsisting deed of conveyance on such property, the grantee on her successors-in-interest will not have legal right to enforce the right the latter may have derived from such an instrument – If a document seeking to convey immovable property ex-facie reveals that the conveyer does not have the title over the same, specific declaration that the document is invalid would not be necessary – Court can examine the title in the event any party to the proceeding sets up this defence. [Para 18]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.