Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, K.RAJASEKAR
S. Govindaraj, S/o. Late V.Shanmugasundaram – Appellant
Versus
Pramila Nagarajan D/o. Late. V.Shanmugasundaram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs' claim for partition rights. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendant's denial of plaintiffs' claims. (Para 4) |
| 3. trial court's findings on property rights. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. legal heirs' entitlement to property. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. confirmation of trial court's judgment. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
The defendant in O.S.No. 3207 of 2022 on the file of the XVII Additional City Civil Court at Chennai is the appellant herein, having filed the Appeal questioning the Judgment and Decree dated 31.10.2023.
2. O.S.No. 3207 of 2022 had been filed by the respondents seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties and to allocate 3/4th share to them and to declare a settlement deed dated 08.04.2011 registered in the Sub Registrar Office at Velacherry as not binding on them and for permanent injunction and other reliefs.
3. The suit had been filed by three plaintiffs Pramila Narayajan, G.Sharmila and R.Bakyalakshmi / sisters against their brother, S.Govindaraj / the appellant herein. In the plaint, they contended that their grandfather M.C.Vijayaranga Nayakar had purchased the suit schedule property by sale deed dated 23.09.1949. Subsequently, M.C.
A settlement deed executed without authority by a deceased father, having only limited rights over property, is null and void, confirming equal shares for all heirs under the Hindu Succession Act.
The settlement deed dated 04.04.1941 was not acted upon, confirming entitlement to a share in the property.
Settlement deeds executed by family members must comply with statutory requirements to be valid; valid titles can be conferred despite contested ownership claims.
A will must be probated to convey title; without probate, a settlement deed executed based on an unproven will is ineffective.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of property rights based on the source of purchase and the validity of settlement deeds executed within a family.
Ancestral property entitlement under Hindu Succession Act limits the plaintiff's share to 1/8, not 3/8, affirming the rights of coparceners post-amendment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the Hindu Succession Act and the determination of entitlement to shares in ancestral and self-acquired properties.
A settlement deed executed without the settlor's knowledge of its contents is invalid.
Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act grants absolute ownership to a female Hindu in possession of property acquired in lieu of maintenance.
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
