Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Bhagwat, S/o Bhulau – Appellant
Versus
Narmada Bai, D/o Bhulau Thawait – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
1. This is defendant No.1 Second Appeal preferred under Section 100 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 14.10.2014 passed by 1st Additional District Judge Janjgir in Civil Appeal No. 86-A/2010 arising out of judgment and decree dated 28.10.2010 passed by Civil Judge, Class-II, Pamgarh, District janjgir Champa in Civil Suit No. 166-A/2007 by which learned District Judge has reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court by partly allowing the appeal declaring the title of the plaintiff Narmada Bai to the extent of ½ of the share in the suit land.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties hereinafter will be referred to as per their status shown in the Civil suit No. 166-A/2007 before the trial Court.
3. The appeal was admitted on 05.10.2015 on the following substantial questions of law:-
(i) Whether the finding of the First Appellate court is perverse regarding declaration of ½ of the share of the suit land to the plaintiff.
4. Brief facts of the case reflected from the record are that the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration of title, partition to the extent of ½ share of the suit land bearing khasra Nos. 722,833/1,1160,1451/1,451/2, 1
The appellate court affirmed a daughter's entitlement to inherit property equally due to her established lineage and the 2005 amendments to inheritance laws granting daughters coparcener rights.
Children from void marriages cannot inherit ancestral property; their rights are confined to their parent's property, consistent with Hindu Succession Act amendments.
A son born from a void marriage has rights to inheritance under amendments to the Hindu Succession Act, affirming equal status to legitimate and illegitimate children in claims for partition post the....
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.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Central enactment prevails over the State law, and the daughters, including those married prior to 1994, are entitled to an equal share in....
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
