Back
G. CHANDRASEKHARAN
RM. Meenal – Appellant
Versus
RM. Sethu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit for partition among joint family members. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claims regarding will execution and property ownership. (Para 3 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. defendant's assertion of sole ownership. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. burden of proof regarding ancestral properties. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. evidentiary requirements for partition claims. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. business ownership and joint family implications. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. impact of the benami transactions prohibition act. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. final ruling on property ownership and partition. (Para 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT :
This is a suit for partition, accounts and costs.
2. The plaintiff is one of the coparceners of the joint family, consisting of her father late P.L.Ramanathan @ P.L.Meenakshi Sundaram and her brother R.M.Sethu. Defendants 2 and 3 are the plaintiff’s mother and sister. The joint Hindu family of late P.L.Ramanathan @ P.L.Meenakshi Sundaram possessed several immovable properties at Chennai, Madurai and Kumbakonam, apart from the properties owned in Malaysia. The proper
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
