Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.MARIA CLETE
Murugan Asari – Appellant
Versus
Chinnammal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the parties and original case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments related to property inheritance and rights (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. criteria for admitting additional evidence under cpc (Para 19 , 21) |
| 4. inconsistency in claims affects admissibility (Para 27 , 29 , 30) |
| 5. devolution of property under pre-1956 law (Para 36 , 42) |
| 6. limitations on karta's powers regarding gifts and alienation (Para 45 , 51) |
| 7. final determination of shares in properties and ruling (Para 70 , 72 , 73) |
JUDGMENT :
A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
This Second Appeal is filed by the first defendant challenging the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge’s Court at Kallakurichi dated 10.07.2013 in AS.No.4 of 2011 confirming the judgment and decree of the second Additional District Munsif Court at Kallakurichi dated 22.10.2010 in O.S.No.269 of 2006.
2.The suit was laid for partition and separate possession. The Trial Court granted a preliminary decree declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/7th share in the suit properties. The same was confirmed by the First Appellate Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present Second Appeal has been preferred.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties
The properties in question were determined to be ancestral, granting coparcenary rights to the daughter under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
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.
The court established that ancestral property retains its coparcenary character despite partition, affirming the rights of legitimate heirs under Hindu law.
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
Daughters are coparceners by birth under the amended Hindu Succession Act, entitled to equal shares in ancestral properties.
The judicial presumption of joint ownership requires proof of a family nucleus, and mere existence of a joint family does not automatically classify all properties as joint.
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
