In order for a woman to assert her rights under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, possession of the property is a necessary requirement : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court in the case of M Sivadasan (Dead) through LRs v. A.Soudamini (Dead) through LRs and others has emphasized that, according to Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956, in order for a Hindu female to assert her rights, she must have possession of the property. Section 14(1) states that any property held by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the Act's commencement, is her full ownership, not limited ownership, but possession is a prerequisite.
In the appeal from Kerala, all the courts below, unanimously ruled against the plaintiffs, asserting that the woman in question had never possessed the property. Therefore, Section 14(1) did not apply in this case.
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia, referred to the precedent set in the case of Ram Vishal (dead) by lrs. and Ors. v. Jagan Nath & Another (2004) 9 SCC 302, which established that possession is a fundamental requirement to claim rights under Section 14(1) of the 1956 Act. The precedent stipulated that a Hindu female must not only possess the property but also acquire it through inheritance, devise, partition, maintenance, gift, skill, purchase, or prescription.
The bench also provided insights on the scope of Special Leave jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. While leave had been granted in this case, it reaffirmed that appellants must demonstrate exceptional and special circumstances to overturn the findings or prove that grave injustice would occur if the challenged decision remained unaltered.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP), confirming the trial court's decree.