Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN
S.Shanthini Devi, D/o.V.Somasundaram – Appellant
Versus
V.Somasundaram, S/o.Late Vishwanathan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit for partition details and parties involved. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. legal principles around entitlement to partition. (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. court's reasoning regarding rights under hindu succession act. (Para 9 , 11 , 15 , 21) |
| 4. explanation of coparcenary characteristics and their application. (Para 13 , 14 , 18) |
| 5. final ruling on the dismissal of the suit. (Para 25) |
JUDGMENT :
G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
The Appeal Suit against the dismissal of the suit for partition and separate possession.
2. The appellants herein are the plaintiffs in the suit for partition and separate possession. They are son and daughter of Somasundaram S/o.Viswanathan. The suit schedule consists of two items of property. The 1st item is the property purchased by K.P.M.Kuppusamy Chettiar on 21.07.1942. The 2nd item is the property which Kuppusamy Chettiar during his lifetime, settled in favour of his wife Krishnaveni and Son Viswanathan vide document dated 19.09.1949. K.P.M.Kuppusamy Chettiar died intestate, leaving his widow Krishnaveni, his son Viswanathan and two daughters, Indirani and Ganga.
3. Krishnaveni Ammal died intestate on 27/04/1975. Viswanathan died intestate on 01.11.2003, leaving
The plaintiffs cannot claim partition in ancestral property during their father's lifetime when the property is determined to be self-acquired rather than joint family property.
Daughter is entitled to a share in ancestral property regardless of claims of absolute ownership by the father, as the property retains its coparcenary nature under Hindu Succession Act.
Daughters have the right to claim a share in ancestral property as coparceners under Sec. 6(1)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act, but their entitlement is limited by the proviso to Sec. 6(1) based on th....
The court affirmed that ancestral property remains so despite partition, and daughters are entitled to equal shares under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended.
Option of seeking for setting aside the sale rests with the plaintiff and it is not mandatory for the plaintiff to seek for setting aside the sale.
The ancestral property, while partitioned, remains joint family property, allowing children of a coparcener to claim their legitimate share despite their father's sale to others.
Daughters have equal coparcenary rights in Hindu Undivided Family properties post-2005 amendment, but prior partitions are valid if established before the amendment.
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
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
