NDLI: Revanasiddappa & Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Hindu Marriage Act 1955
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12 Referred Case 13 Referred Case 14 Referred Case 15 Referred Case 16
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Reference Answered
Headnote	Issue for consideration:Whether a child who is conferred with legislative legitimacy u/s.16(1) or 16(2) is, by reason of s. 16(3), of the Hindu SuccessionAct, 1956 entitled to the ancestral/coparcenary property of theparents or is the child merely entitled to the self-earned/separateproperty of the parents.Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – s. 16 – Children of void and voidablemarriages – Conferment of legitimacy – Inheritance rights oflegitimised children:Held: While conferring legitimacy in terms of s. 16(1) on a childborn from a marriage which is void u/s. 11, and under s. 16(2) toa child born from a voidable marriage which has been annulledby a decree of nullity u/s. 12, it is stipulated in s. 16(3) that sucha child will have rights to or in the property of the parents andnot in the property of any other person – ss. 11, 12. [Para 54(iii)]Hindu Succession Act 1956 – s. 3(1)(j) – ‘related by legitimatekinship’ – Construction of the provisions of s. 3(1)(j) includingthe proviso:Held: Legitimacy conferred by s. 16 of the HMA 1955 on a childborn from a void or, voidable marriage has to be read into theprovisions of the HSA 1956 – Child who is legitimate under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of s.16 of the HMA would, for thepurposes of s. 3(1)(j), fall within the ambit of the explanation ‘relatedby legitimate kinship’ and cannot be regarded as an ‘illegitimatechild’ for the purposes of the proviso – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955– s. 16. [Para 54(iv)]Hindu Succession Act 1956 – s. 6 – Devolution of interestin coparcenary property – Substitution of s. 6 by Act 39 of2005 - Effect:Held: By the substitution of s. 6, equal rights have been granted todaughters, in the same manner as sons as indicated by sub-section(1) of s. 6 – In terms of sub-section (3) of s. 6 as amended, on aHindu dying after the commencement of the Amending Act of 2005his interest in the property of a Joint Hindu family governed by theMitakshara law will devolve by testamentary or intestate succession,and not by survivorship – Said rule of devolution has been madethe norm – Prior to the substitution of s. 6 by the Amending Actof 2005, s. 6 stipulated the devolution of interest in a Mitaksharacoparcenary property of a male Hindu by survivorship on thesurviving members of the coparcenary – Exception to devolution bysurvivorship was where the deceased had left surviving a femalerelative specified in Class I of the Schedule or a male relativein Class I claiming through a female relative, in which event theinterest of the deceased in a Mitakshara coparcenary property woulddevolve by testamentary or intestate succession. [Para 54(v), (vi)]Hindu Succession Act 1956 – s. 6 – Devolution of interest incoparcenary property – Ascertainment of share on basis ofnotional partition:Held: While providing for the devolution of the interest of a Hinduin the property of a Joint Hindu family governed by Mitakshara law,dying after the commencement of the Amending Act of 2005 bytestamentary or intestate succession, s.6(3) lays down a legal fictionnamely that the coparcenary property shall be deemed to havebeen divided as if a partition had taken place – For ascertainingthe interest of a deceased Hindu Mitakshara coparcener, the lawmandates the assumption of a state of affairs immediately priorto the death of the coparcener – Once the share of the deceasedin property that would have been allotted to him if a partition hadtaken place immediately before his death is ascertained, his heirsincluding the children conferred with legitimacy u/s.16 of the HMA,would be entitled to their share in the property which would havebeen allotted to the deceased upon the notional partition, if it hadtaken place. [Para 54(viii), (ix)]Hindu Succession Act 1956 – s. 6(3) – Hindu Marriage Act,1955 – s. 16 – s. 16(3) of the HMA 1955 and s. 6(3) of the HSA1956, if inconsistent:Held: There is no inconsistency between s. 16(3) of the HMA 1955and s. 6(3) of the HSA 1956 – Provisions of the HSA 1956 haveto be harmonized with the mandate in s. 16(3) of the HMA 1955which indicates that a child who is conferred with legitimacy undersub-sections (1) and (2) of s. 16, will not be entitled to rights in orto the property of any person other than the parents – Property ofthe parent, where the parent had an interest in the property of aJoint Hindu family governed under the Mitakshara law has to beascertained in terms of the Explanation to sub-section (3) [Para 54(x)]Judgments/orders – Two judge Bench of this Court in itsreferring judgment Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun held that theillegitimate children will have right in the coparcenary propertyof their parents, self acquired or ancestral – Reconsideration:Held: There is a degree of contradiction in the referring judgmentwhich needs to be clarified and set at rest – Thus, referenceanswered holding that the children born out of the void or voidablemarriage entitled to share in the property of their deceased parentsand not in the property of any other person. [Para 53]Mitakshara Law – Joint Hindu family – Description of:Held: It comprises of male members who are lineal descendantsfrom a common male ancestor, together with their mothers, wivesor widows and unmarried daughters – Joint Hindu family has beendescribed as ‘a larger body’ consisting of a group of persons unitedby sapindaship or family relationship. [Para 21]Mitakshara Law – Hindu coparcenary – Composition of:Held: It comprises of a propositus and three lineal descendants– Hindu coparcenary is a body which is narrower than a HinduUndivided Family – Before 2005, it included only sons, grandsonsand great-grandsons who were holders of joint property – Hallmarkof a coparcenary is that a lineal male descendent up to the thirdgeneration would acquire an independent right of ownership bybirth and the interest of a deceased member would lapse on hisdeath and merge in the coparcenary property. [Paras 22-25].Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – s. 6 – Devolution of interestin coparcenary property in a joint Hindu family governedby Mitakshara law – Position prior to its substitution by Act39 of 2005 and after substitution of s.6 by Act 39 of 2005– Coparcenary rights on daughters in Joint Hindu familiesgoverned by Mitakshara law – Explained. [Paras 26-41]Mitakshara law – Joint Hindu families governed thereunder –Provisions of the HSA 1956 in relation to Joint Hindu familiesof that class – Interpretation of – Hindu Succession Act, 1956.[Para 55]
Judge	Hon'ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 783
Petitioner	Revanasiddappa & Anr.
Respondent	Mallikarjun & Ors.
SCR	[2023] 14 S.C.R. 320
Judgement Date	2023-09-01
Case Number	2844

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Revanasiddappa & Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Revanasiddappa and Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun and Ors.

Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma & Ors.

Subramani and Ors. Vs. M. Chandralekha

Lila Gupta Vs. Laxmi Narain & Ors.

Sharda Vs. Dharmpal

Pramila Vs. Rameshwar and Anr.

Surjit Kaur Vs. Garja Singh and Ors.

Shakuntalabai & Anr. Vs. L.v. Kulkarni & Anr.

Smt. Gurnam Kaur and Anr. Vs. Puran Singh and Ors.

Revanasiddappa & Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun & Ors.

Revanasiddappa & Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Revanasiddappa and Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun and Ors.

Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma & Ors.

Subramani and Ors. Vs. M. Chandralekha

Lila Gupta Vs. Laxmi Narain & Ors.

Sharda Vs. Dharmpal

Pramila Vs. Rameshwar and Anr.

Surjit Kaur Vs. Garja Singh and Ors.

Shakuntalabai & Anr. Vs. L.v. Kulkarni & Anr.

Smt. Gurnam Kaur and Anr. Vs. Puran Singh and Ors.

Revanasiddappa & Anr. Vs. Mallikarjun & Ors.