IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DEEPAK KUMAR TIWARI
Mangali Bai D/o Ramsingh – Appellant
Versus
Sakharam S/o Ramsingh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK KUMAR TIWARI, J.
1. This is a Second Appeal filed by the plaintiffs under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated 30.3.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, (FTC), Pendra Road in Civil Appeal No.123-A/02, which, in turn, arise out of the judgment and decree dated 3.10.2001 passed by the Civil Judge Class-II, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.28-A/2000. By the impugned judgment and decree, the First Appellate Court reversed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.
2. The trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiffs/appellants, declaring their sole title over the suit property, holding that they alone, being the daughters of late Ramsingh, are entitled to inherit the same and the respondent/defendant has no legal right of inheritance in respect of the said property. The trial Court also held that the respondent/defendant has failed to prove a valid adoption in his favour by late Ramsingh. However, by the impugned judgment, while allowing the appeal, the Appellate Court recorded a finding that the respondent/defendant had proved the adoption and accordingly, set-aside the judgmen
Kashi Nath (Dead) through LRs. Vs. Jaganath
Saraswathi Ammal Vs. Jagadambal and another
Shakun Bai Wd/o Somnath Kushram Vs. Siya Bai Wd/o Somnath and others
Salekh Chand Vs. Satya Gupta and others
Ratanlal Vs. Sudarabai Goverdhandas Samsuka (Dead) through LRs. and others
Customary law governs inheritance rights, emphasizing the necessity of proving adoption and community customs for legal validation.
Custom – Custom evolves by conduct – Customs too, like law, cannot remain stuck in time and others cannot be allowed to take refuge in customs or hide behind them to deprive others of their right.
The burden of proof for establishing a custom rests on the party asserting it, and clear and unambiguous evidence is required to prove the custom. The court emphasized the need for continuity, certai....
Section 2 (2) of Hindu Succession Act which is Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to members of any Scheduled Tribe within meaning of cla....
(1) Revenue records are not documents of title, but they are evidence of possession. (2) Succession—Customs are not fossilized structures, nor are they etched on stone but are living organism rooted ....
The validity of adoption requires clear, cogent evidence of factum, including actual giving and taking; mere documentation is insufficient without proof of the legal requirements.
Point of law: unless there is a proof of custom or usage to take a boy in adoption who is more than 15 years old, the boy cannot be taken on adoption. Therefore, while answering substantial question ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.