Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Narendra Kumar Vyas
Kheek Bai @Rambai D/o Amrutlal – Appellant
Versus
Amrutlal S/o late Gopichand Sahu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.)
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafterreferred to as the 'CPC') questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 04.11.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Civil Appeal No.49-A/2010, whereby the first appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent/ defendants and set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.07.2010 passed by the Civil Judge, Class-II, Malkharauda, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Civil Suit No. 16-A/09 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff has been decreed in her favour.
2. The parties to this appeal shall be referred to hereinafter as per their description in the civil suit.
3. This appeal was admitted by this Court on 05.02.2013 on the following substantial questions of law:-
(i) Whether the First Appellate Court was justified in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, which decreed the plaintiff’s suit for declaration of plaintiff’s share in the suit property and also for partition and possession in respect of her share?
(ii)
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.
The burden of proof in establishing joint family property and partition lies with the party alleging its existence. The court also emphasized the entitlement of daughters to share in joint Hindu fami....
In property disputes, all sharers must be joined as necessary parties to ensure valid adjudication of rights, as established in the judgment.
A co-sharer in ancestral property can only sell their share and legal heirs, including daughters as coparceners, must be included in legal proceedings affecting property rights.
Non-joinder of necessary parties does not invalidate a suit for partition if the branches are duly represented.
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.
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
