Back
S. SOUNTHAR
Gowri – Appellant
Versus
Pooraniammal (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the reversing judgment dated 22.07.2013 made in A.S.No.45 of 2009 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Maduranthakam and restore the judgment dated 21.09.2005 made in O.S.No.77 of 2004 on the file of the Court of District Munsiff Court, Maduranthakam and allow the above second appeal.)
1. The defendants 2 to 5 are the appellants. The first respondent and his mother Pooraniammal filed a suit for partition claiming 7/18 share in the suit property. The Trial Court granted preliminary decree for partition of 11/36 share in favour of 1st plaintiff Pooraniammal, 6/36 share in favour of 2nd Plaintiff/1st Respondent, 6/36 share in the suit property in favour of defendants 1 and 3, 3/36 in favour of second defendant and 2/36 in favour of defendants 4 and 5. Aggrieved by granting of decree in respect of items 17 to 20, the appellants preferred an appeal. The first Appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court insofar as items 17 to 20 are concerned and set aside the decree for partition in respect of items 17 to 20. In other respects, the decree passed by the trial Cou
While a registered property holder enjoys a presumption of absolute title requiring strong contrary evidence to rebut, an appellate court retains the discretionary power to admit additional evidence ....
The court affirmed that items 1 and 2 of suit properties are ancestral, and items 3 to 11 are self-acquired, highlighting the plaintiffs' burden to prove family property claims.
Properties in female Hindu's name post-Hindu Succession Act presumed self-acquired; plaintiffs bear heavy burden to prove joint family funds usage.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the availability of ancestral properties for partition and the rights of legal representatives in sharing the properties.
Jointly held family properties can be classified as ancestral, particularly when the purchase is funded by the joint family's income, despite claims of individual contribution.
Self-acquired properties via gift, purchase, and personal funds retain separate character, not blending into ancestral nucleus despite family management.
The court affirmed that daughters are coparceners entitled to equal shares in ancestral property, overriding claims of separate ownership based on the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act.
A partition deed made in good faith to resolve family disputes is legally binding, and claims of ownership must adhere to existing rights.
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
