Vellikannu v. R. Singaperumal & Anr. (2005) MANU/SC/0367/2005
Quick Summary
The Supreme Court held that a murderer cannot inherit from the person he killed. Under Sections 25 and 27 of the Hindu Succession Act, the killer is totally disqualified—no succession, and no enlargement by survivorship. Because the son (killer) was barred, his wife could not claim the father-in-law’s property through him.
Issues
- Does exclusion from inheritance extend to survivorship enlargement under Section 6 HSA?
Rules
| Provision | Principle | Effect Here |
|---|---|---|
| Section 25 HSA | A murderer is disqualified from succeeding to the victim’s estate. | No inheritance for the killer in any capacity. |
| Section 27 HSA | Killer is deemed to have no relationship to the victim’s estate. | Blocks direct succession and indirect benefits like survivorship. |
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Appellant (Wife)
- Because the son murdered his father, Sections 25 & 27 bar him from succession.
- She claimed the entire estate as the only surviving claimant.
Respondent (Son)
- Sought to avoid disqualification and to claim through survivorship.
- Contested the wife’s exclusive claim to the estate.
Judgment
The Supreme Court answered the core question against the son. The bar under Sections 25 and 27 is complete. It covers survivorship too. If the son cannot succeed, his wife also cannot succeed through him to the father-in-law’s property. The claim based on the son’s line therefore fails.
Ratio Decidendi
- A murderer is totally disqualified from succeeding to the victim’s estate (HSA Ss.25 & 27).
- The disqualification extends to survivorship; no indirect benefit.
- Those claiming through the killer also cannot succeed to the victim’s estate.
Why It Matters
The case sets a clear public policy line: no person should benefit from their own wrong. It guides courts and students on how Ss.25 & 27 override survivorship logic when the heir is a killer.
Key Takeaways
- Total disqualification of a murderer under HSA.
- No survivorship enlargement for the killer.
- No derivative claims through the killer’s status.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Kill = Cut Off” — Murder cuts off all routes to inheritance.
- Identify: Did an heir murder the deceased?
- Apply: HSA 25 & 27 → total disqualification.
- Extend: Block survivorship and any through-him claims.
IRAC Outline
Issue
Does the murderer’s exclusion cover inheritance and survivorship under the HSA?
Rule
HSA Section 25 + Section 27 → total disqualification; treated as no relation to the estate.
Application
The son murdered his father; conviction stands. He is barred and cannot benefit directly or indirectly.
Conclusion
No succession or survivorship for the son; wife cannot claim through him to the father-in-law’s estate.
Glossary
- Disqualification
- A legal bar that stops a person from inheriting.
- Survivorship
- A coparcener’s share increasing when another dies—barred for a murderer.
- Public Policy
- Law principle that one cannot benefit from one’s own wrong.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now