Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
R. DEVDAS, B. MURALIDHARA PAI
Maleppa S/o. Venkappa Chanagoudar – Appellant
Versus
Parvatewwa W/O. Arjun Biroji – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B. MURALIDHARA PAI, J.
1. This is the regular first appeal filed by Defendant No.2 in O.S. No.69/2017 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol under Order XLI Rule 1 read with Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.01.2020, passed therein.
2. The parties to this appeal are referred herein as per their status before the trial court.
3. Admittedly, the Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 are the children of one Sri Venkappa Maleppa Chanagoudar and Defendant No.1 namely Smt. Parvatewwa.Defendant No.4 is the son of Defendant No.2.
4. The Plaintiffs, who are the daughters of the propositus, have maintained the suit claiming their 1/7th share each in Schedule B properties i.e. 11 items of landed properties and 2 items of house properties. They have claimed the share in these properties on the ground that they are the joint owners of the schedule properties along with the Defendants and that all these properties are possessed and owned by the parties to the suit jointly.
5. Defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the only contesting Defendants in the case. They have categorically admitted that the Plaintiffs and Defendant Nos.
The court established that there is no presumption of joint ownership in family properties, and the burden of proof to establish such claims lies with the party alleging joint ownership.
Children born from void marriages are entitled to inherit their father's share but do not hold coparcener rights until the father's death.
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 burden of proof lies on the party asserting self-acquisition in joint family property, which is subject to partition among co-owners.
Daughters became coparceners under Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989, allowing them equal rights in joint family properties.
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 joint family status and the trial court's ruling on partition, rejecting claims of prior oral partition due to insufficient evidence.
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
