- (1.) Two specific questions arise for determination in this appeal by the grant of special leave against a Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Firstly, whether re-marriage of a widow prior to Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would divest her of even the limited ownership of her deceased husband's property, having due regard to the provisions of S. 2 of Hindu Widow's Re-marriage Act, 1856 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1856'), and secondly, whether disqualification of inheritance, if any, by reason of re-marriage would stand obliterated by reason of the provisions of the Madras Hindu (Bigamy, Prevention and Divorce) Act, 1949.
(2.) The factual score in the Appeal presently before us reveals that one Rosaiah was the owner of a large extent of properties. He died in February, 1937 leaving behind him his wife Lakshmamma and mother Venkayamma. Rosaiah executed a will on 11th January, 1937, wherein he bequeathed all his properties to his mother Venkayamma. Apart from providing some maintenance, Rosaiah did not provide anything else to his wife Lakshmamma. As a matter of fact in the will he stated that his wife Lakshmamma was not obedient to him and that her father with her aid was trying to knock off all his properties and that his wife was also not living with him. He however in the will provided that, in case his wife was prepared to take a boy of his mother's choice, in adoption, she could do so but the boy so adopted should be under the guardianship of his mother until attainment of majority and in that event would be entitled to certain properties as specified in the will.
(3.) Factual score further depicts that after the death of Rosaiah, Lakshamamma filed a suit (OS No. 52 of 1939) for a declaration as regards her entitlement to all the properties of her husband. The mother, in her turn, also filed another suit for administration of the estate, on the basis of the will mentioned above (OS No. 42 of 1940). It appears from the records that there was in fact a compromise decree between both the mother and the wife of Rosaiah which was recorded by the Court on 19th April, 1942. In the compromise memo Lakshmamma has been referred to as the plaintiff, while Venkayamma, the mother as the first defendant. Clause (a) of the said compromise expressly affirmed the will put forward by the mother, Venkayamma as true and valid and the properties of Rosaiah were categorised into three schedules appended to the said Memo of compromise. Properties mentioned in Schedule-1 were jointly given to both the said ladies with absolute rights. While properties mentioned in Schedule-II were given to both of them jointly with a life estate only. Schedule-III contains three items. Items 1 and 2 were given to the mother, while item 3 was given to the wife. Clause (f) of the said memo of compromise provided as follows :- "(f) The 1st defendant is agreeable that plaintiff shall continue the lineage of late Rosaiah by adopting a boy of her choice within 7 years from now, from the family of Velamuri people or from the family of any other person of the (same) Gotram or from out of the boys of her younger sister as provided within the will executed on 11-1-1937 by the late Rosaiah and receiving him as the adopted son of her husband. As soon as the adoption takes place, the immovable property mentioned in Schedule-II, attached hereto and retained by the plaintiff and the 1st defendant with life-interest the 2nd item in its entirety and half of 3rd item mentioned in Schedule III other than the portion necessary for the residence of the plaintiff and the 1st defendant till their life-time and the plate and cup being used by the plaintiff and the iron safe, pot ((sic)) and 'Panakapu Binde' being used by the 1st defendant at present out of the silverage given to late Rosaiya at the time of the marriage shall be developed on the adopted son himself and he himself shall have absolute rights to the said items. . . . . . . . . .";