Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
S.R.Krishna Kumar, C.M.Poonacha
Sou Pushpa Parashram Marihalkar – Appellant
Versus
Amit S/O. Ajit Padmannavar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘CPC’], by the defendant No.2 challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.04.2018 passed in O.S.No.47/2011 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Belagavi, [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’], whereby, the said suit filed by the respondents No.1 and 2/plaintiffs No.1 and 2 against the appellant/defendant No.2, respondent Nos.3 and 4, who are arrayed as the defendant Nos.1A and 3 respectively before the Trial Court, for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs’ alleged 1/3rd share in the suit schedule immovable property, was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants.
2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as their respective ranks before the Trial Court.
3. The plaintiffs are the sons of defendant No.1-Ajit S/o. late Kugappa Padmannavar, since deceased, represented through his legal representative Smt.Sunita W/o. Late Ajit Padmannavar and defendant Nos.2 and 3 are purchasers of the suit schedule immovable property from defendant No.1, vide re
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 partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
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 court established that ancestral property retains its coparcenary character despite partition, affirming the rights of legitimate heirs under Hindu law.
The right of a daughter to a share in paternal property as a legitimate heir is reaffirmed, irrespective of marriage status, under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
The properties in question were determined to be ancestral, granting coparcenary rights to the daughter under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
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.
Previous family partition and lack of joint family status preclude the plaintiff from claiming coparcenary rights under Hindu law amendments.
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
