HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
Chowdhry, J.C. -
(1.) This is a reference under the proviso to Section 113, C. P. Code, by the learned Senior Subordinate Judge of Nahan, and it has been made in the following circumstances.
(2.) A Hindu widow made a sale of property inherited by her from her husband. The reversioners thereupon brought a suit for a declaration that the alienation is not binding on the reversion. The widow pleaded, 'inter alia', that the Hindu law or custom which imposed restrictions on her right of alienation was inconsistent with the fundamental right of all citizens to dispose of property under Article 19 (f) and therefore void under Article 13(1) of the Constitution of India. The learned Judge has referred the case for the opinion of this Court on the point as there exists no precedent of this Court or of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court, his own opinion being in favour of the widow's contention.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and am clearly of the opinion, that the plea taken by the widow is quite untenable. The learned counsel Hoshiar Singh and Anr. vs. Mt. Kowla and Ors. (07.03.1952 - HPHC) Page 1 of 3 appearing for her confined his argument to a citation of the aforesaid provisions of the Constitution. He also cited Article 15 of the Constitution and argued that the restriction on the widow's power of alienation further amounted to discrimination on the ground of sex alone.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.