Back
DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
Janki Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Rambali – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff-Janki Prasad challenging the judgment & decree dated 9.3.1998 passed by learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Satna in Civil Appeal No. 10-A/89 confirming the judgment & decree dated 11.7.1989 passed by learned 2nd Civil Judge Class-I, Satna in Civil Suit No. 9A/82 (old No.97-A/73) and 9A/1/82 dismissing both the civil suits.
2. In short the facts are that the plaintiff/appellant instituted civil suit No. 9A/82 for declaration that the sale deed dated 18.5.1972 (Ex.P/11-c) executed by his father Laxmiprasad in favour of defendant 1-Rambali to be null & void. Another civil suit No. 9A/1/82 was also filed by plaintiff/appellant for declaring the sale deed dated 3.7.1970 (Ex.P/11) null & void executed by his father Laxmiprasad in favour of Gayaprasad, who is father of Rambali. Both these civil suits were consolidated by learned trial Court and by passing the impugned judgment & decree dated 11.7.1989 were disposed off and dismissed.
3. The said civil suits were filed for declaring the sale deeds dated 3.7.1970 and 18.5.1972 as null and void on the ground that plaintiff-Janki Prasad’s father Laxmiprasad did not possess any le
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding nature of a sale deed executed by the family manager, the entitlement of daughters to ancestral property under the Amended Hindu Succes....
Self-acquired property of a deceased does not remain joint family property post-death under Hindu Succession Act provisions.
A member of an Aliyasantana family has a pre-existing right to seek partition of family property without needing to cancel a sale deed executed by another family member, provided the alienation was n....
The court reaffirmed that a sale deed executed for family and legal necessity by a joint family member is binding, barring challenge by family members after significant delay without sufficient cause....
The court held that plaintiffs, being aware of a prior family sale, cannot invalidate it after a significant delay, as they lack standing to seek partition in this context.
The court established that a sale of ancestral property requires clear evidence of family necessity to be binding on co-owners, and the limitation period for challenging such sales is twelve years un....
The daughter, as a coparcener, has the right to challenge alienations made prior to the amendment of the Hindu Succession Act on the ground of want of legal necessity.
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
