Back
B. M. SHYAM PRASAD, G BASAVARAJA
Kasturibai – Appellant
Versus
Hemachandra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.M. Shyam Prasad, J.
1. These appeals are by the plaintiff and some of the defendants in O.S. No. 207/2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalgund (for short, 'the civil Court'). The appeal in RFA No. 100507/2020 is by the plaintiff, the appeal in RFA No. 100016/2020 is by the third to fifth defendants and the appeal in RFA No. 100148/2021 is by the tenth to fourteenth defendants. The parties for reasons of convenience are referred to as per their rank in the suit.
2. The civil Court, on 24.10.2019, has partly decreed this suit in O.S. No. 207/2010 declaring that the plaintiff, the first and third to fifth defendants are entitled to one fifth share each in certain agricultural lands and non-agricultural properties listed in the plaint schedules. The civil Court has also directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer, National Highway Authorities, Dharwad to release the amount payable under the award dated 17.11.2014 in SLAO/LAQ/CR/CR55/2014-15 to the first defendant.
3. The plaintiff is aggrieved because his claim for declaration of share and partition by metes and bounds is accepted only for certain agricultural lands and non-agricultural properties wh
Daughters were denied coparcener status under old inheritance laws but still claimed joint family property rights; trial court granted them shares based on family law principles.
The presumption of joint family property necessitates proof of individual ownership; without such proof, a child has a right to claim share in ancestral property.
Previous family partition and lack of joint family status preclude the plaintiff from claiming coparcenary rights under Hindu law amendments.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish the remaining land after a sale of joint family property and the probative value of registered documents in determi....
The court clarified the interpretation of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act and held that it did not apply in this case, as it had been repealed and the plaintiffs had a right to seek partition ....
The court upheld the presumption of joint family property, ruling that no valid partition had been established, thus entitling the plaintiffs to their shares.
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
