HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 - CASE LAW - Section 8
Uttam Singh v. Saubhag Singh
(law on the concept of "ancestral property" under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the formation of a HUF by the surviving members of the deceased.)
Bench: Kurian Joseph J. ,Rohinton Fali Nariman J.
Facts:
- The Appellant/Plaintiff’s grandfather, Jagannath Singh, had died in 1973. His widow, Mainabai and 4 children (including the father of the Appellant) survived him. The Appellant had been born in 1977, after the death of his grandfather.
- The Appellant sought partition to isolate his 1/8th share in the joint family property. The Appellant filed a suit against his father and three of his father’s brothers (Respondents).
Issue:
Is the property held by his father is ancestral property or not, for the partition?
Contentions raised by Respondent:
- Once Section 8 gets applied by reason of the application of the proviso to Section 6, the joint family property ceases to be joint family property thereafter, and can only be succeeded to by application of either Section 30 or Section 8, Section 30 applying in case a will had been made and Section 8 applying in case a member of the joint family dies intestate.
- The property ceases to be joint family property, and this being the case, no right to partition a property which is no longer joint family property continues to subsist in any member of the coparcenary.
Contentions raised by Appellant:
- It is only the interest of the deceased in such coparcenary property that would devolve by intestate succession, leaving the joint family property otherwise intact.
- Section 8 of the Act would not bar such a suit as it would apply only at the time of the death of Jagannath Singh i.e. the grandfather of the plaintiff in 1973 and not thereafter to non suit the plaintiff, who as a living coparcener of joint family property, was entitled to a partition before any other death in the joint family occurred.
- He also argued that the Hindu Succession Act only abrogated the Hindu Law to the extent indicated, and that Sections 6and 8 have to be read harmoniously, as a result of which the status of joint family property which is recognized under Section 6 cannot be said to be taken away upon the application of Section 8 on the death of the plaintiff’s grandfather in 1973.
Held:
On the death of Jagannath Singh in 1973, the joint family property which was ancestral property in the hands of Jagannath Singh and the other coparceners, devolved by succession under Section 8 of the Act. This being the case, the ancestral property ceased to be joint family property on the date of death of Jagannath Singh, and the other coparceners and his widow held the property as tenants in common and not as joint tenants. Thus, on the date of the birth of the appellant in 1977 the said ancestral property, not being joint family property, the suit for partition of such property would not be maintainable.
