Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
B.Natarajan – Appellant
Versus
M.Sidhanandam (Died) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of property ownership (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. defendants' arguments against plaintiffs' claims (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 20 , 22 , 24 , 25) |
| 3. court's analysis on family property and wills (Para 27 , 28 , 31 , 34 , 35 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 49 , 50 , 53 , 54 , 56 , 70) |
| 4. legal conclusions regarding ownership and possession (Para 30 , 36) |
| 5. final conclusion of case dismissal (Para 72 , 73) |
JUDGMENT :
V. Lakshminarayanan, J.
The plaintiffs are the appellants. They assail the judgment and decree of the court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri in A.S.No.57 of 1989 dated 15.09.2000 in partly confirming the judgment and decree of the court of the Subordinate Judge at Dharmapuri in O.S.No.28 of 1989 dated 21.08.1989 and thereby dismissing their suit for declaration of title and for permanent injunction.
2. The plaintiffs are the nephews of the defendants. Originally, the suit was presented before the learned Subordinate Judge at Krishnagiri in O.S.No.66 of 1984. Subsequently, the same was transferred to the file of the learned Subordinate Judge at Dharmapuri
A Karta under Mitakshara law cannot alienate joint family property via a Will; it is a family arrangement. Possession under a void document can lead to adverse possession if maintained for the requis....
Point of Law : In the case of a void document, a party assailing such a document need not seek its cancellation or a declaration that the said document is not binding on the said party. Such a situat....
The properties in question were determined to be ancestral, granting coparcenary rights to the daughter under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
A coparcener cannot execute a settlement deed favoring non-coparceners without consent, rendering it void; however, a sale executed by the Kartha for family necessity is valid and binding on minor co....
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.
The property in question ceased to be ancestral due to prior Release Deeds; plaintiffs failed to prove their claim for partition and their action was barred by limitation.
Gift by a coparcener of his undivided interest in coparcenery properties as void - Coparcener can make a gift of his undivided interest in coparcener property to another coparcener or to a stranger....
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
