Back
K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
Renganayagi – Appellant
Versus
N. Kandasamy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prayer: These second appeals are filed under section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2011 made in A.S. No. 53 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Mayiladurai, reversing the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2009 made in O.S. No. 89 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sirkali and allow the second appeal.
1. Since the issue involved in both the second appeals, is same, this common judgment is being delivered.
2. The appellant in S.A. No. 77 of 2012 is the plaintiff in the suit and the appellant in S.A. No. 655 of 2012 is the second defendant in the suit in O.S. No. 89 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sirkali.
The second defendant sailed along with the plaintiff and both are claiming 1/3rd share in the suit property.
3. It is a suit for partition and separate possession claiming 1/3rd shares in the suit properties by the plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to, as they are ranked before the trial Court.
4. Averments made in the plaint, in brief, are as follows:
The main legal point established was the requirement for proper framing of points for consideration and the need for additional evidence when relying on documents such as Ex.B.2 in reaching a decisio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evidence in establishing the nature of the suit property and the entitlement to seek relief by way of partition, as well as the i....
In property disputes, properties obtained through partition are considered self-acquired, affirming the right of absolute ownership and the validity of subsequent transfers unless proven otherwise.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that properties derived by the father through a partition deed are to be treated as his self-acquired properties, as per Section 8 of the Hindu Suc....
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.
Oral transfers of property are invalid without formal documentation; joint heirs maintain equal ownership rights upon intestate succession.
A son born from a void marriage has rights to inheritance under amendments to the Hindu Succession Act, affirming equal status to legitimate and illegitimate children in claims for partition post the....
Joint family property is presumed until proven otherwise; prior partition must be established by metes and bounds to be valid.
In the absence of established oral partition, co-owners have equal shares in the property, as per Section 47 of the Transfer of Property Act.
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
