Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN, MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
Valliammal, S/o Late K.Krishnasamy Gounder, D/o Late Sellappa Gounder – Appellant
Versus
N.Lakshmi, W/o Late S.K.Natarajan, Behind Elementary School, Vijayapuram, Kangayam Road – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lawsuit relates to property inherited from nalli gounder. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. contentions regarding the mortgage and claims of the parties. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. trial court dismissed the claim for lack of proof. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 4. arguments on jurisprudence of partition suits and mortgage rights. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. distinction in rights regarding usufructuary mortgage clarified. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 6. appellants' claims dismissed, trial court judgment confirmed. (Para 32 , 33) |
JUDGMENT :
G.Jayachandran, J.
Judgment and decree dated 17.12.2008 passed in O.S.No.401 of 2005 challenged by the plaintiffs, on being aggrieved by its dismissal.
2. Gist of the plaint is as follows:-
Thiru.Nalli Gounder (late) had a vast extent of land including the suit property. On his death, the property devolved on his four sons namely Subbia Gounder, Palani Gounder, Arumuga Gounder and Vinayaga Gounder. On 01.03.1918, they entered into a partition deed in respect of the property left by their father, Nalli Gounder and got registered. Under the deed of partition, for their convenient sake, they divided the properties into “A” schedule and “B” schedule. The “A” Sched
The right of redemption in usufructuary mortgages is not extinguished by time alone; however, failure to redeem within the stipulated period limits the mortgagor's rights, impacting partition claims.
Ouster among co-sharers requires hostile animus, long exclusive possession known to other co-owner; mere possession insufficient.
The court affirmed that daughters are entitled to equal shares in ancestral properties post-amendment, invalidating wrongful transactions made without their consent.
The amendment of co-parcenery rights retroactive effects and joint possession presumption prevent claims of ouster without substantial evidence.
A mortgage executed by a natural guardian without court permission is voidable against minors, and the limitation period for challenging such a mortgage is governed by Article 59 of the Limitation Ac....
In a partition suit, registered documents act as constructive notice, initiating the limitation period. Prolonged exclusive possession of ancestral property by a co-owner establishes ouster. Addition....
Properties claimed as self-acquired were determined to be ancestral; the appeal for partition was dismissed due to lack of joint possession evidence and non-joinder of necessary parties, also barred ....
A partition can be pursued despite unproven Wills, affirming joint possession while emphasizing the need for valid claims against co-owners.
The court affirmed that mere allegations of illegitimacy do not negate the plaintiffs' rights to inheritance, and the defendants failed to prove their claims of oral partition and sale.
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
