Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
D K SINGH, S RACHAIAH
Bobba Ramesh, S/o. Sathyanarayan – Appellant
Versus
Sharfunnisa, W/o. Atta Ulla Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
D K SINGH, J.
The present First Appeal has been filed under Section 96 R/w Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC against the judgment of decree dated 13.04.2016 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru, in O.S.No.90/2008.
2. The plaintiffs' had filed suit for partition of the properties left behind by late Mahaboob Shariff. The description of the properties are given in the plaint. The plaintiff's are the brothers and sisters of late Mahaboob Shariff.
3. The defendant No.4, who is the appellant herein had purchased the suit schedule property in Item No.5, from the widow of late Mahaboob Shariff. The suit came to be filed by the plaintiffs. The defendant No.4 was proceeded ex-parte, since he did not answer the summons. Defendant No.1 i.e., Rafeeqa Banu, wife of Late Mahaboob Shariff and defendant No. 5 also died during the pendency of the suit and their legal heirs were brought on record, before the impugned judgment and decree could be passed. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned trial Court framed the following issues:
"1. Whether defendant No.2 proves that late Mahaboob Shariff executed gift deeds dated 18.08.1991 and 31.03.2003, making gift of suit sche
Appellant entitled only to a 1/4th share in the property purchased from the deceased's widow, clarifying rights of legal heirs in partition proceedings.
In partition suits, the burden of proof initially rests with the plaintiff to establish relationship and property rights, which, once substantiated, shifts to the defendants to disprove.
A party in a civil suit cannot raise new contentions in an appeal that contradict their earlier pleadings and must adhere to the evidence presented.
In matters of inheritance in joint family properties, ancestral status prevails unless a valid Will is presented; thus, equitable shares must be allocated accordingly.
Bona fide purchasers must act in good faith and with reasonable inquiry to gain protection under ownership claims; mere ignorance of actual ownership is not sufficient.
Married daughters are entitled to a share in joint family properties, and their marital status does not negate their legal rights to inheritance as established by the Hindu Succession Act.
Daughters have equal rights as coparceners in ancestral property under the Hindu Succession Act as amended in 2005, affecting share distribution in partition cases.
A joint family property remains so despite claims of prior partition; a coparcener retains rights to inheritance under the Hindu Succession Act.
A daughter's entitlement to inherit a share as a co-parcener in ancestral property is upheld, emphasizing the need to distinguish between ancestral and self-acquired properties.
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
