Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s.14 – Clarity and certainity in interpretation:
Held: This Court noticed that while following Tulsamma, the subsequent decisions in Thota Sesharathamma, Masilamani Mudaliar and Shakuntala Devi have made passing observations about the discordant note in the case of Karmi, Bhura and Gumpha but they have not been clearly and categorically overruled – Perhaps this is the reason why the subsequent decisions consistently followed the idea in Karmi and enunciated different principles in the subsequent decisions of Gumpha, Sadhu Singh and that perspective continued on its own strength – This Court having realised that there are a large number of decisions which are not only inconsistent with one another on principle but have tried to negotiate a contrary view by distinguishing them on facts or by simply ignoring the binding decision – This Court is of the view that there must be clarity and certainty in the interpretation of Section 14 of the Act – In view of the above, the Registry is directed to place the order of this Court along with the appeal paper book before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India for constituting an appropriate larger bench for reconciling the principles laid down in various judgments of this Court and for restating the law on the interplay between sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. [Paras 23, 24 and 25]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. 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.