Case Note & Summary
The appellants, who were the plaintiffs in the suit, filed a second appeal against the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court dismissing their suit for declaration and injunction. The suit properties originally belonged to Govindhasamy Gounder, who executed a registered Will on 19.10.2007 bequeathing the suit properties in favour of the plaintiffs. Under the Will, the 1st defendant (Pattammal) was given a life estate over the 'A' schedule properties. The 1st defendant, without any right to alienate, executed two sale deeds on 29.03.2012 in favour of the 2nd and 3rd defendants in respect of 'B' and 'C' schedule properties, which were part of the 'A' schedule properties. The plaintiffs sought a declaration that they are entitled to the 'A' schedule properties after the lifetime of the 1st defendant and an injunction restraining the defendants 2 and 3 from claiming absolute right over the 'B' and 'C' schedule properties. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the first appellate court confirmed the dismissal. The appellants then filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court framed a substantial question of law regarding the validity of the sale deeds executed by the life estate holder. The court held that a life estate holder has only a right to enjoy the property during his/her lifetime and cannot alienate the property beyond his/her life interest. Any transfer by a life estate holder without power of sale is void ab initio and does not confer any title on the purchaser. The court further held that the concurrent findings of fact by the courts below were perverse and based on a misreading of the Will. Accordingly, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the courts below, and decreed the suit as prayed for.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Life Estate - Transfer by Life Estate Holder - A life estate holder has only a right to enjoy the property during his/her lifetime and cannot alienate the property beyond his/her life interest. Any transfer by a life estate holder without power of sale is void ab initio and does not confer any title on the purchaser. (Paras 6-8) B) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a second appeal lies only on a substantial question of law. The concurrent findings of fact by the courts below cannot be interfered with unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. (Para 5) C) Will - Construction - Life Estate vs. Absolute Estate - Where a Will bequeaths property to a person for life and thereafter to others, the first taker gets only a life estate and the remaindermen get vested remainder. The life estate holder cannot defeat the rights of the remaindermen by alienating the property. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sale deeds executed by the life estate holder (1st defendant) in favour of defendants 2 and 3 are valid and binding on the plaintiffs who are the remaindermen under the Will.
Final Decision
The second appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree of the first appellate court in A.S.No.39 of 2018 dated 13.08.2019 and the trial court in O.S.No.474 of 2012 dated 23.03.2018 are set aside. The suit is decreed as prayed for. Consequently, C.M.P.No.7283 of 2026 is closed.
Law Points
- Life estate
- Transfer by life estate holder
- Void ab initio
- Section 100 CPC
- Second appeal
- Substantial question of law
- Will construction
- Life interest vs. absolute interest
