By Khushi Kundu
In the case of Loknath v. Shribachahh Kumar Bhoi & Ors, a single judge bench which consisted of Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal was of the view that the essentials of a valid remarriage consists of a widow losing her right in the previous husband’s property when remarriage is used as a defence, it also needs to be proved that a catastrophic instance has taken place with the widow thus depriving her from her right to property.
The consequence of remarriage is more effective when the widow no longer has her rights regarding the property from her husband.
In this particular case the widowed wife had remarried in the year 1954 and she did not have any interest in suit property and thus did not become the full owner by Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
The court was still of the view “It is quite vivid that under Section 14(1) of the Act of 1956, to get attracted, the property must be possessed by the female Hindu on coming into force of the Act of 1956.
The object of this provision is firstly, to remove the disability of a female to acquire and hold property as an absolute owner and secondly, to convert any estate already held by woman on the date of commencement of the Act as a limited owner, into an absolute estate.”
The Chattisgarh High Court observed that the first appellate Court is absolutely justified in dismissing the suit filed against the defendants and as such, the second appeal deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s).
Also, by virtue of Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act, 1937, defendant No.1 became the limited owner of the property.
Decree is to be drawn-up accordingly.