Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
Shivakka W/o Laxman Baganar - Appellant – Appellant
Versus
Laxman A/F Sidramappa Baganar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR, J.
The plaintiffs have filed this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 18.10.2014, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol, in O.S.No.18/2010, thereby, the suit filed for declaration, partition and separate possession is dismissed.
2. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 to 8 constitute a Hindu undivided joint family. The suit properties are ancestral properties. It is stated in the plaint with reference to genealogy annexed to the plaint that one Rannappa is the original propositus and he has two sons namely Yallappa and Sidramappa. Yallappa has eight children who are defendants No.1 to 8. Sidramappa has no issues. Therefore, it is contended that Sidramappa has taken defendant No.1 in adoption, thus, defendant No.1 is claiming to be adopted son of Sidramappa. The plaintiffs are wife and children of defendant No.1.
3. When this being the fact, all the defendants No.1 to 8 have sold the suit property, which is coparcenary property, in favour of defendant No.9 through a registered sale deed. It is contended that defendant No.9 is not a bona fide purchaser. Therefore, the said sale deed is not bind
Registered sale deed is binding and valid under Hindu Law for bona fide purchasers, even when contested by coparceners unless proven otherwise.
Joint family property retains its character unless proven otherwise; sales by co-parceners without all parties' consent do not extinguish shared rights.
The validity of a sale deed executed by a Hindu Undivided Family member is upheld when legal necessity is demonstrated, despite claims of ancestral rights by co-parceners.
The court reaffirmed that a sale deed executed for family and legal necessity by a joint family member is binding, barring challenge by family members after significant delay without sufficient cause....
A property must reflect active participation from all family members to be considered joint family property; claims based on mere assertions are insufficient for legal recognition.
The court affirmed that ancestral property rights are inherent to all coparceners, and sales executed without consent are invalid.
(1) Right of a Karta to sell joint family property is well settled – Karta enjoys wide discretion with regard to existence of legal necessity and in what way such necessity can be fulfilled – Whether....
The court reaffirmed that prior sales of property before the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act are protected and binding, setting aside the trial court’s decree granting shares to plaintiffs....
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
