1. Dispute over partition of properties governed by Marumakkathayam law — claim regarding whether properties are tharwad property or separate/patrilineal property. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL, JJ.
Ramachandran and Others – Appellants
Versus
Vijayan and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2161 of 2012
Decided On : 22-11-2024
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. M. P. Vinod, AOR Mr. Atul Shankar Vinod, Adv.
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. A. Raghunath, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. M. P. Vinod, AOR Mr. Atul Shankar Vinod, Adv.
Under Marumakkathayam law, property obtained by a female and her children in partition retains its tharwad characteristics, ensuring rights for future descendants.
Headnote:(A) Marumakkathayam Act, 1932 - Section 3(c) - Partition of property - The appeal concerns the nature of property under Marumakkathayam law, affirming that property obtained by a female and her children in partition retains its tharwad characteristics - The High Court's findings on the nature of the properties were upheld, confirming the preliminary decree of the Trial Court. (Paras 58, 60)
(B) Marumakkathayam Law - The court clarified that a female member receiving property in partition does so as tharwad property, ensuring rights for future descendants - The dissenting opinion from the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court was upheld, emphasizing the change in property nature upon partition. (Paras 32, 58)
Facts of the case:
The dispute arose from a partition suit concerning properties belonging to Andipillil Tharwad, with plaintiffs claiming rights as descendants of Parukutty Amma, while defendants contested the nature of the properties. (Paras 9-10)
Findings of Court:
The properties were confirmed as tharwad properties, with the High Court affirming the Trial Court's preliminary decree for partition. (Paras 16, 60)
Issues: The main issues were whether the properties obtained by a female and her children in partition are separate or tharwad properties, and the legal rights of Parvathy Amma in transferring property. (Paras 1, 22)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that properties received by a female in partition retain their tharwad nature, protecting future generations' rights, and clarified the legal standing of partition under Marumakkathayam law. (Paras 32, 58)
Result: Appeal dismissed; the preliminary decree of the Trial Court is affirmed. (Para 60)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appellants contend properties are co-ownership or patrilineal property; respondents argue they are tharwad properties acquired by a natural group of matrilineal heirs. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 )
3. Partition alters property nature from joint to single ownership; a single female cannot constitute a thavazhi; concurrent findings of fact generally warrant no interference. (Para 24 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 55 , 56 , 57 )
4. Partition converts joint tharwad property into separate property; a single female receiving a share does not form a thavazhi and holds property in her own right. (Para 33 , 39 , 41 , 58 )
5. Appeal dismissed — preliminary decree for partition affirmed. (Para 60 )
6. Does property obtained by a single female during a tharwad partition retain its character as tharwad property?
No. Partition terminates joint ownership and vests shares in severalty. A single female does not constitute a thavazhi; thus, the property ceases to be joint and becomes her separate property, and future children do not acquire a right by birth in it. (Para 33 , 39 , 41 , 58 )
7. Does property allotted to a group or branch during a tharwad partition retain tharwad characteristics?
Yes. When a group holds property allotted during partition, it is held jointly with all incidents of tharwad property. Consequently, future tharwad members born into that group acquire an interest in the property. (Para 43 , 44 )
8. Under what circumstances can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact under Article 136?
Interference is justified if the findings are divorced from evidence, contrary to law, perverse, arbitrary, or cause grave injustice. It is not warranted merely because a different view of the facts is possible. (Para 55 , 56 )
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL, J.
1. The instant appeal, preferred by the original defendants, assails the judgment dated 27.08.2009 passed by the High Court of Kerala in A.S. No. 563 of 1999 whereby the appeal was dismissed and the preliminary decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S.631/1999 was affirmed.
MARUMAKKATHAYAM CUSTOMARY LAW - AN INTRODUCTION
2. The present appeal concerns the devolution of property by way of traditional Marumakkathayam law. Prior to delving into the legal niceties, an understanding of certain foundation concepts is necessary.
3. The Hindu community being a vast and diverse community is governed by different schools of personal laws. Apart from the dominant Mitakshara school of law, some communities among Hindus have their own system of personal law like the Marumakkathayam law, the Nambudiri law or the Aliyasantana law. In the issue at hand, parties are admittedly governed by the Marumakkathayam law. With respect to Marumakkathayam law, this Court has stated in Achuthan Nair v. Chinnamu Amma, 1965 SCC Online SC 303:
“6. …The said law [Marumakathayam law] governs a large section of people inhabiting the West-Coast of South India. “Marumakkathayam” literally means descent through sisters' children. There is a fundamental difference between Hindu law and Marumakkathayam law in that, the former is founded on agnatic relationship while the latter is based on matriarchate. The relevant principles of Marumakkathayam law are well settled and, therefore, no citation is called for...”
4. Under this law, tharwad, thavazhi, karanavan are dominant concepts with respect to joint family. A tharwad is a Marumakkathayam joint family comprising of a female ancestor, her children, her daughter’s children, her daughter’s daughter’s children and all such other descendants, however remote, in the female line. By necessary exclusion, only the immediate male heir is part of the tharwad while his progeny are not. A person belongs to tharwad of his or her mother only.2 [K. Sreedhara Variar Marumakkathayam and Allied Systems of law in the Kerala State, First Edition, 1969] Membership of a tharwad is acquired by virtue of birth alone and on death, his interest devolves upon the other members of the tharwad. Members of a tharwad do not have a fixed interest but a fluctuating one, subject to change as per the number of members of the tharwad. Unlike coparcenary in Mitakshara law which extends to three generations succeeding the last male holder of the property, the Marumakkathayam system gives equal rights to all persons, however remote.
5. A tharwad is a larger body which holds within itself many branches. These branches are known as thavazhi which is a group of descendants in the female line of a female common ancestor. A thavazhi can own properties, separate and distinct from tharwad properties. In other words, a marumakkathayee woman alongwith her children and further descendants, how low-soever, in a female line constitute thavazhi.
The concepts discussed above would be best explained by way of illustrations as under:
ILLUSTRATION:
A is married to AH. They have three children- two daughters, AD1 and AD2, and a son, AS. All members shown above with the exception of AS1 form the tharwad of:
A. This is in line with the matrilineal succession or in other words, the female being the ‘stock of descent’. AD2 with her children C, the daughter and B, the son and grandchildren C1 and C2 forms a thavazhi.
6. A karanavan is a manager of a joint family property. It is the oldest male member of the family. However, this customary position does not exclude a woman from managing the affairs of the tharwad or thavazhi if no male member is capable of taking up the required duties. Under Madras Marumakkattayam Act, 1932, it is defined as under:
“Section 3(c) ‘karanavan’ means the oldest male member of a tarwad or tavazhi, as the case may be, in whom the right to management of its properties vests or, in the absence of a male member, the oldest female member or
