Back
H. P. SANDESH
Parth Ghorpade, S/O Indrajeet D. Ghorpade – Appellant
Versus
Indrajeet D. Ghorpade, S/O Late D. B. Ghorpade – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
H.P.Sandesh, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 6.
2. This appeal is filed against the order dated 20.07.2024 passed on I.A.Nos.1 to 3 in O.S.No.905/2021 rejecting the applications, wherein the relief is sought to restrain defendant Nos.2 to 6 from interfering, alienating and putting up of construction over the application schedule property.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiffs before the Trial Court is that the plaintiffs filed the suit for the relief of partition and separate possession and also for the relief of declaration to declare that the sale deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendant Nos.3 to 6 is not binding on the share of the plaintiffs. It is contended that defendant No.1 has suppressed the fact with a malafide intention to deprive the legitimate rights of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property and has illegally executed the sale deed and by virtue of sale deed, defendant Nos.2 to 6 have started not only to carry out construction but have also indulged in sale of flats to third parties with a view to make huge profits. Since the suit schedule property is a vacant lan
The court emphasized that ancestral property remains joint family property unless legally disposed of, and the birth of a son creates coparcenary rights.
The court established that ancestral property retains its coparcenary character despite partition, affirming the rights of legitimate heirs under Hindu law.
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
Daughters have equal rights and shares in ancestral joint family properties under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
The ancestral property, while partitioned, remains joint family property, allowing children of a coparcener to claim their legitimate share despite their father's sale to others.
The court affirmed that ancestral property remains so despite partition, and daughters are entitled to equal shares under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of ancestral properties available for partition and the validity of gift settlement deeds.
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
