Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
D.K.SINGH, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Saravanamma W/o Late Rajashekaraiah – Appellant
Versus
Leelavathi T R D/o Late Rajashekaraiah – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed impugning the judgment and decree dated 16.01.2015 passed in OS.No.29/2011 instituted by plaintiff - Smt. Leelavathi T.R. herein respondent No.1 in the present appeal seeking a partition of the suit schedule properties (39 in number). One Rajashekharaiah married Rudranamma and Sarvanamma, two real sisters. The plaintiff is the daughter born through second wife of Rajashekharaiah named Smt. Sarvanamma, who is defendant No.1 in this suit. Two sons and one daughter namely T.R. Shivaprakash, T.R. Divakara and Smt. T.R. Rathnakumari, were born from the first wife namely Smt. Rudranamma. The Rajashekharaiah died in the year 1960. Smt. Rudranamma had died around 10 years prior to institution of the suit by the plaintiff. The father of Smt. Rudranamma and Smt. Sarvanamma was Mr. Nanjappa Shetty. Mr. Nanjappa Shetty had registered a gift deed in favour of his two daughters namely Smt. Rudranamma and Smt. Sarvanamma in respect of the suit schedule in Item Nos.1 to 7, 9 to 12 and 14 and 15. The registered gift deed is dated 21.08.1962 marked as Ex-D20.
2. It i
The court determined that properties acquired through gift and sale are self-acquired and not joint family properties, granting the plaintiff an entitlement of 2/6th share.
The court emphasized that revenue records alone do not establish title in partition suits; the burden of proof lies on the claimant to provide concrete evidence.
The burden of proof lies on the party claiming ownership in partition suits, and mere revenue records are insufficient without supporting documentation.
Daughters are entitled to equal inheritance rights as sons under Hindu law, reaffirmed by the court when the Will excluding them was not proved valid.
The court established that property acquired by an individual during their lifetime is self-acquired and not ancestral, impacting the distribution of shares among heirs under the Hindu Succession Act....
The court clarified the application of Sections 14(1) and 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, emphasizing the need to include all rightful heirs in partition suits.
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 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 established that evidence must substantiate claims of oral partition, prioritizing the registered Partition Deed as definitive proof for ancestral property entitlements under the Hindu Succ....
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
