Back
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Basavaraj Shivappa Meti – Appellant
Versus
Premabai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties' claims for partition based on ancestral property. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding ownership rights under hindu succession act. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's considerations on the nature of inherited properties. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. understanding of coparcenary principles and succession rights. (Para 12 , 13 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. partial allowance of the appeal regarding specific properties. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - The suit in O.S.No.247/2000 is filed for the relief of partition and separate possession. There are five properties described in the plaint. Four are agricultural lands and one is the residential house. The suit is filed by the wife and children of late Kanaksingh. The relationship is not in dispute. The genealogy is as under:
2. One Govind Singh was the propositus. He died in 1972. After his demise, the properties were inherited by his wife Smt.Bhavani Bai, two sons i.e. Kanaksingh and Raghunath Singh and two daughters i.e., Smt Padma Bai and Smt Ambu Bai. The admitted facts would reveal that after the demise of Govind Singh, wife of Govind Singh and his two daughters did not make any claim in respect of the
The main legal point established in the judgment is that properties derived by the father through a partition deed are to be treated as his self-acquired properties, as per Section 8 of the Hindu Suc....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of ancestral properties available for partition and the validity of gift settlement deeds.
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.
A claimant must prove the ancestral nature of properties to claim entitlement under the amended Hindu Succession Act; mere assertions without evidence are insufficient.
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
Court ruled that ancestral property retains its character despite prior partition and upheld the validity of a Will despite exclusion of a natural heir.
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
