Back
K. BABU
M. BASHEER RAWTHER (DIED) – Appellant
Versus
SALMA AMMAL (DIED) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. BABU, J.
1. The Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Court, Mavellikkara in A.S. No. 138 of 1998.
2. The plaintiff is the appellant. Respondents 1 and 2 are the defendants.
3. Sri. Basheer Rawther, the original plaintiff, instituted O.S. No. 260 of 1994 before the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Mavellikkara, seeking partition of the plaint schedule property, which is 32 cents of land situated in Re-survey No. 436/3 of Choonakara village and a building therein. The Trial Court decreed the suit allowing partition of the plaint schedule property. The First Appellate Court reversed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court.
4. The late Sri. Basheer Rawther instituted the original suit seeking partition and allotment of 7/16th share in the plaint schedule property. The property originally belonged to Sri. Mytheen Picha Rawather, the late father of Sri. Basheer Rawther.
5. The plaintiff is the son born in the wedlock between Sri. Mytheen Picha Rawather and his first wife. Defendants 1 and 2, Salma Ammal and Sri. Nazar are the second wife and son, respectively, of Sri. Mytheen Picha Rawather.
The plaintiff pleaded t
Implied consent to a bequest under Mohammedan Law cannot be inferred from silence or inaction; it must be established through affirmative acts.
Point of Law : Section 100 of CPC provides that, (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in body of this Code or by any other law for time being in force, an appeal shall lie to High Court from ever....
Mahomedan law restricts testamentary bequests to one-third of the estate without consent from other heirs, a principle courts erred in evaluating, leading to misjudgment of the plaintiff's rights.
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.
The court affirmed the validity of a Will executed under proper procedures, ruling that mere relationships or opportunities do not imply undue influence unless proven with clear evidence.
![N. Kalavathy VS Sriramulu Naidu [deceased] - 2023 Supreme(Mad) 1817](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Madras_2.png)
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
