Case Note & Summary
The High Court dismissed a review petition challenging its earlier judgment in a Hindu succession case. The petitioners sought review of a judgment that had allowed a husband to inherit a share in property that his deceased wife had inherited from her father. The Court held that the scope of review is limited and found no error apparent on the face of the record. The Court clarified that Section 15(2)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act applies only when a female Hindu dies without leaving any sons or daughters, which was not the case here. Since the deceased left behind children, succession was properly governed by Section 15(1)(a), which includes the husband as an heir. The Court rejected the argument that the husband should be excluded from inheriting parental property of the deceased female Hindu.
Headnote
Review Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking review of judgment dated 17.12.2020 passed in R.F.A. No.1867/2007 -- Petitioners contended that succession to property inherited by deceased female Hindu from her father should be governed by Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (the Act) which excludes husband from inheritance -- Court held that scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is extremely limited and review is permissible only when there is error apparent on face of record -- Court examined Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act and found that its application is expressly conditioned upon absence of any son or daughter of deceased -- Since deceased left behind two sons and one daughter, condition precedent for invoking Section 15(2)(a) was not satisfied -- Court held that succession was properly governed by Section 15(1)(a) of Hindu Succession Act which includes husband as heir -- Review petition dismissed as no error apparent on face of record was established
Issue of Consideration
The Issue of Consideration was whether the judgment dated 17.12.2020 passed in R.F.A. No.1867/2007 suffered from any error apparent on the face of the record warranting review under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the review petition, holding that no error apparent on the face of the record was established. The Court upheld its earlier judgment that succession was governed by Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act and the husband was entitled to a share in the property.
Law Points
- Scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure is extremely limited
- Succession to property of female Hindu dying intestate is governed by Section 15(1) of Hindu Succession Act when children are alive
- Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act applies only in absence of sons or daughters
- Review jurisdiction cannot be used for re-appreciation of evidence or re-argument on merits
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (02) 63
Review Petition No.100061 of 2021
Dr. Justice K. Manmadha Rao
Sri. Ashok R. Kalyanshetty for petitioners, Sri. Vinay S. Koujalagi and Sri. V.M. Sheelavant for respondent
Shri. Mallikarjun Gururaj Koujageri, Shri. Suresh Gururaj Koujageri, Smt. Sudha W/o. Shivaprasad
Gururaj Gadegeppa Koujageri (since deceased on 27-04-2018) represented by Basavannevva D/o. Guruppa Yalaburgi
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Review petition challenging appellate court judgment in property partition suit
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought review of judgment dated 17.12.2020 passed in R.F.A. No.1867/2007 to reconsider applicability of Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act
Filing Reason
Petitioners contended that judgment under review suffered from error apparent on face of record regarding interpretation of Hindu Succession Act provisions
Previous Decisions
Trial Court decreed suit excluding husband from inheritance -- Appellate Court allowed appeal in part and allotted shares to husband under Section 15(1) of Hindu Succession Act
Issues
Whether the judgment under review suffers from any error apparent on the face of record warranting review under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC?
Whether succession to property inherited by female Hindu from her father is governed by Section 15(1) or Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act when she leaves behind children?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act with non obstante clause excludes husband from inheriting parental property
Petitioners contended that absence of word 'husband' in Section 15(2)(a) indicates legislative intent to exclude husband
Respondent argued that review petition is not maintainable as issues were already adjudicated in appeal
Respondent contended that review cannot be used as appeal in disguise
Ratio Decidendi
The scope of review under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC is extremely limited -- Section 15(2)(a) of Hindu Succession Act applies only when a female Hindu dies without leaving any sons or daughters -- When children are alive, succession is governed by Section 15(1) of Hindu Succession Act which includes husband as heir -- Review jurisdiction cannot be used for re-interpretation of statutory provisions when a plausible interpretation has already been adopted
Judgment Excerpts
A review is permissible only when there is an error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new and important evidence which was not within the knowledge of the party despite due diligence, or for any other sufficient reason analogous thereto
Section 15(2)(a) of the Act carves out an exception and provides that property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased, upon the heirs of the father
In the present case, it is an admitted fact that Smt.Sushila died leaving behind two sons and a daughter. Therefore, the condition precedent for invoking Section 15(2)(a) of the Act is not satisfied
Procedural History
Original suit O.S. No.3/2001 filed for partition and separate possession -- Trial Court decreed suit on 30.05.2007 excluding husband from inheritance -- Regular First Appeal R.F.A. No.1867/2007 filed by defendant No.1 -- Appellate Court allowed appeal in part on 17.12.2020 and allotted shares to husband -- Review Petition No.100061 of 2021 filed challenging appellate judgment -- Review petition heard on 05.02.2026 and dismissed on 20.02.2026
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 47 Rule 1, Section 114
- Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Section 15(1), Section 15(2)(a)
