Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Shreya Vidyarthi v. Ashok Vidyarthi
AIR 2016 SC 139
JUDGES: Ranjan Gogoi and N. V. Ramana
Date of Decision: 16-12-2015
FACTS:-
The case made out by the respondent-plaintiff was that the plaintiff’s father died on 14.03.1955 leaving behind two widows, out of which, the second widow had managed the day to day affairs of the family living jointly. The second wife was a nominee of an insurance policy and was also receiving a monthly maintenance from a trust from which she purchased a suit property but it was contended by the plaintiff that the suit property is a joint family property having being purchased out of joint family funds. As the dispute arose, the plaintiff and his mother were not permitted to enter the suit property and the instant suit for permanent injunction and partition was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff. Trial Court dismissed the suit and the High Court reversed the order of the trial court. Hence the appeal lies.
ISSUE:-
Whether a Hindu widow can act as Karta of a Hindu Joint Family?
JUDGMENT:-
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that a Hindu widow could not be treated as Karta of a joint family though she can be the manager of the joint family.
There can be no doubt that a Hindu widow is not a coparcener in the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) of her husband and, therefore, cannot act as a Karta in the HUF after the death of her husband but the two expressions i.e. Karta and Manager may not be understood synonymous and the expression “Manager” may be understood as denoting a role distinct from that of the Karta. Hypothetically, taking the case in a HUF where the male adult coparcener has died and there is no male coparcener surviving or in the instant case, where the surviving male coparcener is a minor. In such a situation, the HUF does not come to an end. The mother of the male coparcener can act as a legal guardian of the minor and can also act as a Karta in her capacity as the minor’s legal guardian. She can assume the role of a ‘manager’ in her capacity as a natural guardian of the sole surviving male coparcener, to manage the day-to-day affairs of the HUF until the sole male coparcener which is minor attains majority. This is because a Hindu widow is not a coparcener in the HUF but she can enjoy limited estate during her lifetime after the death of her husband. Such a role as a manager has to be distinguished from that of the Karta, the position a Hindu widow cannot assume by virtue of her disentitlement to be a coparcener in the HUF of her husband. Regrettably the position remains unaltered even after the amendment of the Hindu Succession Act in 2005.
HELD:-
The Court held that the women could not be treated as Karta of a Hindu Undivided family, though she can be a manager of a joint family, in some particular circumstances.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
