Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV
Krishnabai Babya Navale – Appellant
Versus
Shankar Lahu Gharat – Respondent
Milind N. Jadhav, J.
1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Advocate for Appellant and Mr. Patwardhan, learned Advocate for Respondents.
2. This Second Appeal is filed to challenge the judgment dated 21.01.2017 passed by the learned District Court, Raigad, Alibag in First Appeal No.62 of 2006. Regular Civil Suit No.50 of 2002 is filed by Appellant’s sister Savitribai in the Civil Court at Uran seeking partition and her share in the Hindu joint family property i.e. kul right in the estate of her deceased father Ramji Patil and deceased mother Yenibai / Venibai Ramji Patil.
3. By judgment dated 08.02.2006, the Suit was decreed by the learned Trial Court. By judgment dated 21.01.2017, First Appeal filed by Appellant was dismissed by the learned District Court, Raigad at Alibag. Hence, present Second Appeal.
4. On 03.07.2017, this Court admitted the Second Appeal and framed the following substantial questions of law:-
“(i) Whether the trial Court and the Appellate Court whilst passing the impugned Judgment and decree have erroneously ignored the provisions of Sections 32M, 32G, 85, 85-A and 320 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (the said Act), 1948, and the orders passed in 19
Statutory titles established under tenancy laws are binding and preclude claims for partition unless substantial evidence supports joint ownership, failing which civil court jurisdiction is ousted.
The civil court retains jurisdiction to adjudicate on joint family property matters, even when tenancy rights are involved, unless specifically barred by the Tenancy Act.
The civil court retains jurisdiction to adjudicate on joint family property matters, even when tenancy rights are involved, unless specifically barred by the Tenancy Act.
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction to determine property disputes involving joint family ownership, regardless of individual titles issued under the Tenancy Act.
The issuance of purchase certificates under the Maharashtra Tenancy Act does not confer exclusive ownership to one coparcener, as the properties remain joint family properties, and the Civil Court ha....
Brother cultivating widow's land is 'member of owner's family' under tenancy law Section 4(1)(a), excluding deemed tenancy absent tenancy proof; Section 32F protects widow's retained lands from tenan....
Brother cultivating widowed sister's land is family member under Section 4(1)(a), not deemed tenant without proof of tenancy; widow's retained lands protected under Section 32F. Concurrent findings u....
The court upheld the presumption of joint family property, ruling that no valid partition had been established, thus entitling the plaintiffs to their shares.
Joint family property is presumed until proven otherwise; prior partition must be established by metes and bounds to be valid.
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
