Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, C.M.POONACHA
Jakkavva W/o Mahadev Hanamannavar – Appellant
Versus
Ramappa S/o Laxman Yadranvi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S.No.194/2015 have knocked the doors of this Court being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree dated 09.09.2020 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Gokak [Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’] whereby the said suit filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the respondents/defendants for partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit schedule properties was dismissed by the Trial Court.
2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:
a) One Siddappa was the propositus of the family, who had a son Laxman, who undisputedly died intestate on 22.07.1996. The genealogical tree of the parties is as under:
b) As can be seen from the aforesaid genealogical tree, the aforesaid Laxman, who died on 22.07.1996 was married to one Tangevva, who was his first wife through whom he had three sons viz., i) late Yallappa, ii) Ramappa and iii) Jakkavva. The deceased Yallappa left behind his wife Mahadevi and four children. The aforesaid Jakkavva is the plaintiff No.1 while her brother-Ramappa is defendant No.1 and Yallappa’s heirs are defendants No.3 to 7 in the suit.
c) During the lifetime
Established children, regardless of legitimacy, have equal rights to inheritance under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which recognizes prior mutations as binding for determining property shares.
The court reaffirmed that daughters have equal rights as sons in ancestral properties, emphasizing the applicability of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act.
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 plaintiff, as the legatee of Lakshmidevamma under the Will, stands in the place of Lakshmidevamma. Lakshmidevamma was entitled to be treated as a regular coparcener of the Hindu joint family orig....
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 presumption of joint family status in Hindu law requires clear evidence to establish prior partition; the Appellate Court allowed partition of one property acquired post-partition while dismissin....
The court affirmed the rights of daughters as coparceners in ancestral properties under amended Hindu Succession Act, allowing them equal shares alongside sons.
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.
Point of law: A daughter of a coparcener by birth becomes a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son. She has the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she....
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
