Summary
A granddaughter sought partition and possession through her father, who had died before both his father and grandfather. The Supreme Court upheld rejection of the claim on the succession history before it. The property had devolved on the great-grandfather’s two surviving sons and, upon their partition, become the grandfather’s exclusive share, which he sold during his lifetime. The claimant could assert no higher entitlement than her father, and neither partition nor the registered sale had been challenged.
Issues
- Whether the claimant could obtain partition through her predeceased father in the property subsequently allotted to her grandfather.
- Whether the grandfather’s partition share could be disposed of during his lifetime.
Provisions considered
- Section 6 as applicable at the relevant time, Hindu Succession Act, 1956The Court considered the historical succession provision and rejected the claim through a grandson who had predeceased the ancestor while his own father remained alive. (¶¶ 16, 19, 20, 21, 22)
Held
- On the family history presented, the claimant’s father could not have succeeded during his father’s lifetime, and the claimant could claim no higher right through him. (¶¶ 19, 20, 22)
- The two surviving sons succeeded equally in 1965 and partitioned in 1967. The property allotted exclusively to the claimant’s grandfather was held in his individual capacity and could be sold by him. (¶¶ 20, 22)
- Neither the 1967 partition nor the 1979 registered sale was challenged; the suit sought only partition and possession. The cited decisions concerning Class I heirs did not support the claimant’s case. (¶¶ 20, 21)
Result
Appeal dismissed without costs. The High Court judgment rejecting the partition and possession claim was upheld; pending applications were disposed of.