Skip to content


Gauri Vs. Chandramani - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1875)ILR1All262
AppellantGauri
RespondentChandramani
Excerpt:
hindu law - hindu widow--family dwelling-house--right of residence. - 1. it does not appear to have been admitted that the property was held by lachman parshad and beni madho in equal shares, but assuming it was the joint property of the two brothers, the widow of beni madho is entitled to live in it, it being the house in which she resided with her husband. she cannot be ousted by a purchaser of her nephew's right. mangala debi v. dinanath bose 4 b.l.r. c.j. 72 : s.c. 12 w.r. o.j. 35. the house is a small one, and it is not shown that one moiety is more than suilicietit as a residence for the mussammat. we shall not therefore disturb the decree of the lower appellate court, but dismiss the appeal with costs.
Judgment:

1. It does not appear to have been admitted that the property was held by Lachman Parshad and Beni Madho in equal shares, but assuming it was the joint property of the two brothers, the widow of Beni Madho is entitled to live in it, it being the house in which she resided with her husband. She cannot be ousted by a purchaser of her nephew's right. Mangala Debi v. Dinanath Bose 4 B.L.R. C.J. 72 : S.C. 12 W.R. O.J. 35. The house is a small one, and it is not shown that one moiety is more than suilicietit as a residence for the Mussammat. We shall not therefore disturb the decree of the lower appellate Court, but dismiss the appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //