Back
NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI
Man Kunwar Bai, D/o. Late Latel Gadaria – Appellant
Versus
Mana Bai, (Dead) Through Lrs- Kanwal Pal, S/o. Kusuwa Pal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J.)
1. This second appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and decree dated 06.10.2012 passed in Civil Appeal No.100A/2012 by Upper District Judge, Kabeerdham (Kawardha) (CG), whereby the learned first appellate Court has set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2010 passed in Civil Suit No.31A/2009 by Civil Judge Class-II, Kabeerdham whereby, learned trial Court granted decree in favour of the plaintiff by holding that the plaintiff is entitled for 1/6th share of the property mentioned in Schedule A and 1/3rd share of property mentioned in Schedule B and entitled for the partition accordingly.
2. Facts of the case in nutshell are that the parties are relatives and their family tree has been shown as under:-
Kevra had two sons namely Lathel and Fandu. Latel has two daughters namely Manabai and Mankunwar(plaintiff) and one son namely Mansingh. Kevra was the owner of the land bearing Khasra No.70 area 0.23 acre, Khasra No.185 area 2.68 acre total 2.91 acre situated at village Surajpura (Schedule A in the plaint) and after his death, the property wa
A co-sharer’s right to ancestral property is inherent and cannot be extinguished by absence from the parental home.
The presumption of joint family property necessitates proof of individual ownership; without such proof, a child has a right to claim share in ancestral property.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evidence in establishing the nature of the suit property and the entitlement to seek relief by way of partition, as well as the i....
Properties claimed as self-acquired were determined to be ancestral; the appeal for partition was dismissed due to lack of joint possession evidence and non-joinder of necessary parties, also barred ....
The court ruled that an oral partition established the properties as separate and self-acquired, barring claims for partition after 18 years and validating a gift deed executed by the coparcener.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of ancestral properties available for partition and the validity of gift settlement deeds.
The burden of proof regarding partition, the reliance on revenue records and patta, and the presumption of joint-ness in the absence of proof of partition were central legal principles established in....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that properties derived by the father through a partition deed are to be treated as his self-acquired properties, as per Section 8 of the Hindu Suc....
A partition suit is non-maintainable if necessary parties, such as co-sharers, are not included, as effective decrees cannot be passed without their presence.
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
