US Constitution Trumps Presidential Tariff Powers
28 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance with Court Summons Amounts to Contempt: Allahabad HC Issues Warrant Against HDFC Life Branch Head in Cheating Bail Case
02 Mar 2026
Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P.SANDESH
SMT S M SHANTHAMMA – Appellant
Versus
SRI MUNIVENKATAPPA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
H.P.SANDESH, J.
Heard learned counsel for appellant counsel and also learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.12 and 17.
2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the first Appellate Court.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the trial court in the suit which is filed for the relief of partition and separate possession, in detail leaded before the trial court that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 10 are relatives and suit schedule property are joint family properties in joint possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 10 and also pleaded that registered gift deed dated 21.06.1984 executed by Tenkayala Papaiah in favour of defendant Nos.8 to 10 in respect of suit schedule property item Nos.2 and 3 is not binding on her. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that the properties conveyed under the gift dated 21.06.1984 is also an ancestral properties and further contention that sale of properties shown under s
Ancestral properties in joint family require unanimous consent for valid alienation; prior partitions without necessary family consent are not binding on co-parceners.
Conclusive evidence supporting claims of self-acquired property is required; mere assertions without documentation do not suffice to prove ownership against established joint family property.
Partition rights and classification of properties under succession laws are critical in determining share entitlement among siblings.
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
Listen Article