http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7
PETITIONER: NATHOO LAL
Vs.
RESPONDENT: DURGA PRASAD
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/04/1954
BENCH: HASAN, GHULAM BENCH: HASAN, GHULAM MAHAJAN, MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN, MEHAR CHAND (CJ) BOSE, VIVIAN
CITATION: 1954 AIR 355 1955 SCR 51 CITATOR INFO : RF 1957 SC 540 (46)
ACT: Hindu Law-Female- Alienation in her favour- Whether any presumption of law that she does not get absolute or alienable interest in the, property-Whether the case of a male and that of a female different.
HEADNOTE: It may be taken as well settled that there is no warrant for the proposition of law that when a grant of immoveable property is made to a Hindu female she does not get an absolute or alienable interest in such property unless such power is expressly conferred upon her. The law is that there is no presumption one way or the other and there is no difference between the case of a male and the case of a female and the fact that the donee is a woman does not make the gift any the less absolute where the words would be sufficient to convey an absolute estate to a male. Mohamed Shumsool v. Shewakram (2 I.A. 7), Nagammal v. Subbalakshmi 1(1947) I.M.L.J. 641 and Ram Gopal v. Nand Lal (A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 139) referred to.
JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 59 of 1953. Appeal from the Judgment and Order dated the 5th April, 1950, of the High Court of Rajasthan ...