Back
M. A. ABDUL HAKHIM
J Santhakumari, (Died) (Legal Heirs Recorded) Kunnuvilakathu Veedu – Appellant
Versus
Mohanan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.A.Abdul Hakhim, J.
1. The above Regular Second Appeals arise from OS No.541/1987 of the Principal Munsiff’s Court Thiruvananthapuram. OS 541/1987 was a suit for partition. RSA No. 868/2017 arises from the Preliminary Decree dt 30.08.1994 in the suit. RSA No. 960/2015 arises from the Final Decree dt. 06.12.2008 in I.A No. 5512/2005 in the suit. Both the Appeals are filed by the legal heirs of the Original 3rd defendant.
2. The parties are referred according to their status before the Trial Court.
3. The plaintiffs 1 & 2 filed the suit against the defendants 1 to 5 with the averments to the effect that the plaintiffs & the 2nd defendant are the sons of the 1st defendant, the 5th defendant is the daughter of the 2nd defendant, the 4th defendant is the Second wife of the 1st defendant. The plaintiffs and defendants 1,2, 4 and 5 are Hindu Nadars governed by the Hindu Mitakshara law of succession. The Plaint A Schedule Property having an extent of 44 cents is a portion of a larger extent having an area of 3.2 Acres, which originally belonged to Kutty Nadar, grandfather of the 1st defendant. The said Kutty Nadar had two sons, namely, Madan Nadar and Velayudhan Nadar. The 1st defe
The court established that ancestral property retains its coparcenary character despite partition, affirming the rights of legitimate heirs under Hindu law.
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
The court affirmed that ancestral property remains so despite partition, and daughters are entitled to equal shares under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended.
Daughters have equal rights and shares in ancestral joint family properties under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
The ancestral property, while partitioned, remains joint family property, allowing children of a coparcener to claim their legitimate share despite their father's sale to others.
The amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act grants daughters equal rights as coparceners, allowing them to claim shares in ancestral properties irrespective of their birth date.
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
