Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU
Uraran Das Banjare S/o Firtu Banjare – Appellant
Versus
Sukhbai W/o Kanwal Das – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. title and possession in ancestral property. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendant's arguments against plaintiff's claims. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. trial court findings on ancestral property. (Para 5 , 10) |
| 4. defendant's appeal and questions of law. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. legal definitions and burdens regarding ancestral properties. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 6. conditions for valid relinquishment and title stability. (Para 19 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. limits of second appeal jurisdiction and findings of fact. (Para 24 , 27) |
| 8. conclusion dismissing the second appeal. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, J.
1. Heard on admission.
2. Appellant/defendant No.1 has preferred this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity “CPC”) against the judgment and decree dated 9.8.2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Bemetara in Civil Appeal No. 9A/2017 thereby dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 1.4.2017 passed in Civil Suit No.22-A/2014 by which learned Civil Judge Class-I Bemetara (CG) has decreed the suit of respondent No.1/ plaintiff for declaration of title and separate possession after partition.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that
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.
Ancestral properties must be proven to remain joint family properties post-partition; otherwise, they are deemed separate and not subject to partition claims.
A co-sharer’s right to ancestral property is inherent and cannot be extinguished by absence from the parental home.
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....
The main legal point established is the application of Sec. 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, the exclusion of contrary evidence, and the principles of Hindu Law regarding co-parcenary property and....
The absence of evidence proving the joint family status of properties allows a presumption that they are individual assets; thus, plaintiffs' claim for partition is dismissed.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of ancestral properties available for partition and the validity of gift settlement deeds.
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
