Back
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, P. B. BALAJI
M. S. S. Jabar – Appellant
Versus
S. Sheik Ussain Rawuthar (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, P.B.BALAJI, JJ.
Prayer:- Appeal filed under Order XLI Rules 1 & 2 r/w. Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree, dated 31.07.2015, made in O.S.No.38 of 2013, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul.
The unsuccessful defendants 2 to 5, who suffered a decree in a partition suit filed by the plaintiffs 1 to 6, are the appellant before us.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal.
3. The parties are Muslims. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the property originally belonged to one Saiyappa Rowuthar, who had two sons by name, Kader Mohaideen Rawuthar, Sheik Mohaideen Rawuthar. The son, viz., Kadher Mohaideen Rawuthar died leaving behind his only son viz., Mohamed Ibrahim Rawuthar. Sheik Mohaideen Rawuthar married one Mariyam Beevi. They were blessed with 3 sons (viz., Sheik Ussain Rawuthar (first plaintiff), S.Mohamad Abupakkar (first defendant) and Sahul Hameed (father of plaintiffs 2 to 5) and 3 daughters (viz.,Barisha Beevi, Subaitha Abdul Jack and Badhunisha. The said Sheik Mohaideen Rawuthar died leaving behind Sheik Ussain Rawuthar (fir
A partition deed long acted upon by all parties through possession and alienation is binding and cannot be reopened by descendants, especially when the original parties to the partition accepted the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unless prior partition is established, there shall be a presumption that the property is joint family property, and a family arrangement in th....
The court upheld that evidence of prior oral partition negates subsequent claims for joint ownership and emphasizes the need for comprehensive evidence when seeking partition in familial disputes.
The presumption of joint family status in Hindu law requires clear evidence to establish prior partition; the Appellate Court allowed partition of one property acquired post-partition while dismissin....
The court clarified the interpretation of Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act and held that it did not apply in this case, as it had been repealed and the plaintiffs had a right to seek partition ....
The heavy burden of proof upon the proponent of oral partition before it is accepted, as per the settled principle of law by the Apex Court.
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
