Supreme Court: Widow's limited interest becomes absolute under Section 14(1) without partition

The case concerns a dispute over property rights under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, where the Appellants (legal representatives of Ganapati) challenge the High Court's decision that a widow's limited interest in property became absolute under Section 14(1) of the Act, 1956, without requiring partition.

Appellants: Ganapati (Dead) by his LRS; Respondents: Prabhakar & Others (including Defendant No. 3, Tatappa Baburao Burashi); Bench: S.V.N. Bhatti, J.

• The Court held that a widow's limited interest under Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, becomes absolute under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, without requiring partition.
• The High Court's decision was set aside as it failed to consider that Kashibai's right became absolute under Section 14(1).
• The Court clarified that a widow's right to maintenance is a pre-existing legal right, and her limited interest blossoms into absolute ownership under Section 14(1).
• The Court rejected the contention that oral partition was necessary for the widow's interest to become absolute.

Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.

The original document