Back
C. T. RAVIKUMAR, RAJESH BINDAL
Rajinder Kaur (Deceased) Through Legal Heir Usha – Appellant
Versus
Gurbhajan Kaur (Deceased) Through Lrs Upinder Kaur – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajesh Bindal, J.
Leave granted.
2. The present appeals arise out of a suit for partition1[ Civil Suit No. 4406 of 2005] filed by the appellant for partition of the property jointly owned at that time by the appellant-plaintiff and respondents-defendant Nos.1 to 9. Defendant Nos.10 to 14 were impleaded in the suit as they were stated to be tenants on the part of the property. During the pendency of the suit before the Trial Court2[Civil Judge (Junior Division), U.T. Chandigarh] respondent-defendant No.3, Bhupinder Singh, having sold his share to S.C. Bhalla, he was impleaded as defendant No.3(a). Further, defendant Nos.6 to 9 having sold their shares to the subsequent buyers, who were impleaded as defendant Nos.15 to 19.
3. After the amendments were carried out in the plaint, considering the subsequent events and impleadment of subsequent buyers, the final prayer was for partition of the suit property by metes and bounds and in case not possible, sale thereof by open auction and distribution of the sale proceeds amongst the co-sharers. Prayer was also made for directing the defendant Nos. 3 to 9 to furnish accounts of rent collected by them from tenants and a direction to the
Partition Suit – At the time of passing of preliminary decree declaring rights of several parties interested in property, Court may give such further directions as may be required.
The court established that joint contributions to property construction entitle all contributors to claim shares, regardless of prior agreements.
A partition deed long acted upon by all parties through possession and alienation is binding and cannot be reopened by descendants, especially when the original parties to the partition accepted the ....
The doctrine of lis pendens does not affect third parties' rights in property disputes, reinforcing the non-binding nature of agreements on non-parties.
Purchasers cannot claim more than what their transferor legally owns; a property can only be sold according to rightful ownership, ensuring correct partition among heirs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that wrongful construction made by a co-owner during the pendency of a partition suit without the consent of other co-owners cannot be considered i....
An oral partition under Hindu law is valid if acted upon, thus denying claims to share post-partition by siblings who were not involved in the original arrangement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
