Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
PRADEEP KUMARSRIVASTAVA
Ashok Kumar Mahto @ Ashok Mahato, son of Pran @ Paran – Appellant
Versus
Sasadhar Mahto, son of Pran @ Paran @ Chunram Mahto – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRADEEP KUMARSRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Instant Second Appeal has been preferred being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment passed by District Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur dated 28.02.2004 passed in Title Appeal No. 20/1998 whereby and whereunder the judgment and decree passed by learned Trial Court (Civil Judge, Junior Division), Ghatshila in Title Suit No. 23/1994 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff has been reversed and set aside and appeal filed by the plaintiff/appellant was allowed.
2. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that the respondent/plaintiff brought a suit for declaration of their right, title and interest and recovery of possession of 1 decimal land with house standing thereon pertaining to plot No. 27, Khata No. 34 as well as 21 2/3 Acres of land of Khata No. 34 of different plot situated in Amlagora Mauza, P.S. Chakulia, Dist. East Singhbhum.
3. The case of the plaintiff is that plaintiff’s father has three brothers namely Radha Mahto, Pran @ Chuna Ram Mahto and Kanu Mahto forming a Hindu Joint Family and they had possession of three houses and agricultural land jointly in the revenue records of right published in the year 1964 but after the p
A claim of partition in Hindu joint family property must be substantiated with credible evidence; conjecture does not suffice.
In disputes regarding partition of joint Hindu family property, the burden of proof lies on the party asserting partition, and the presumption of jointness remains unless clear evidence to the contra....
A party seeking partition must challenge the validity of prior transactions affecting the property and cannot seek partition of property that has been sold and is in the possession of third parties w....
A joint family is presumed to remain joint unless a clear severance of status is proven, even without a physical division of property.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish the remaining land after a sale of joint family property and the probative value of registered documents in determi....
The main legal point established is that the plaintiff's possession was proved through various documents, and the first defendant had no standing to dispute the partition.
The court affirmed the joint family status and the trial court's ruling on partition, rejecting claims of prior oral partition due to insufficient evidence.
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
