HEGDE, - (1.) THE Judgment of the court was delivered by
(2.) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the decision of Madhya Pradesh High court in second appeal No. 938 of 1965 on its file. The facts found which are no more in dispute, and relevant for the purpose of deciding the questions of law arising for decision in this appeal may now be briefly stated. One Gulli Gotamia had two sons by name Girdharilal and Nandoo. From the material on record, it is not possible to find out the date of death of Gulli Gotamia but admittedly he died leaving behind him his aforementioned two sons. Girdharilal and Nandoo were divided. Girdharilal died on May 17, 1920. His first wife had pre-deceased him. But at the time of his death, his second wife Ladii Bahu was alive. On his death his widow took possession of his properties. Girdharilal's brother Nandoo had two children, Gajadhar and Lachhi. Lachhi died issueless. Gajadhar also is dead. He has two children Dindayal (1st defendant) and Prameshwar Dayal (second defendant). Girdharilal had a daughter from his pre-deceased wife by name Konsa Bai. She died in 1943. Ladii Bahu had a daughter by name Nanni Bai who died in 1941. The children of Nanni Bai, Narbada Bai, Raja Ram, Ram Narain and Gaya prasad are the plaintiffs in the suit. 789 Ever since the death of Girdharilal, Ladii Bahu was in possession of the suit properties. She gifted those properties to her daughter Nanni Bai on 30/07/1936 and put the donee in possession of the same. Thereupon Konsa Bai filed a suit in 1937 seeking a declaration that the gift deed in question is not binding on her and that it cannot come in her way in inheriting the suit properties on the death of Ladii Bahu. That suit was decreed on 3/05/1937. As mentioned earlier, Nanni Bai died in 1941. On her death, the plaintiffs came into possession of the suit properties. Ladii Bahu took wrongful possession of the suit properties from the plaintiffs on 1/06/1951 under the guise of enforcing the decree in the suit filed by Konsa Bai. Thereafter she continued to be in exclusive possession of the suit properties. On 27/05/1952, she gifted some of those properties to one Rameshwar Prasad and the remaining properties she gifted to the appellants on 21/03/1957. She died on 9/04/1960. The Hindu Succession Act came into force on 17/06/1956.
(3.) TWO questions namely (1) What is the effect of the possession taken by Ladii Bahu on 1/06/1951, and (2) Did Ladii Bahu become the full owner of those properties in view of Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, were presented to the High court as well as to the courts below for decision. The High court came to the conclusion that Ladii Bahu's possession of the suit properties after 1/06/1951, was that of a trespasser and assuch she did not become an absolute owner of those properties on the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act. It also held that the plaintiffs became entitled to the suit properties on the death of Ladii Bahu as the nearest reversioners of Girdharilal.;