Back
RENUKA YARA
J. Ramabhadra Raju – Appellant
Versus
Mothkala Laxmamma – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Manda Adam, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri S. Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri D. Kaval Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 35. Perused the entire record.
2. This is an appeal preferred by appellant/defendant No.2 aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 20.08.2018 passed by the Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy (‘trial Court’), in O.S.No.53 of 2013, wherein the suit filed for partition was preliminarily decreed by partitioning the suit schedule property that is item No.2 of suit schedule A property and schedule B properties into three equal shares and allotting the same to plaintiff/respondent No.1, defendant Nos.1 and 3/respondent Nos.2 and 3 and by partitioning the item No.1 of the suit schedule A property into two equal shares among the plaintiff/respondent No.1 and defendant No.1/respondent No.2.
3. The appellant herein is defendant No.2, respondent No.1 herein is plaintiff, respondent No.2 herein is defendant No.1 and respondent No.3 herein is defendant No.3 before the trial Court. Respondent Nos.4 to 35 are subsequent purchasers, who got impleaded in the
A bona fide purchaser is one, who pays valid sale consideration and not a person who gets sale deed registered in his favour without payment of sale consideration.
The sale of property cannot supersede joint family ownership claims without valid evidence of prior partition or separate acquisition.
The court ruled that the plaintiffs' claims over certain properties were invalid due to prior sales, emphasizing the necessity of declarations regarding property ownership in joint familial contexts ....
The court upheld the principle that evidence of joint familial ties and prior agreements significantly influences property ownership claims in partition suits.
Daughters became coparceners under Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989, allowing them equal rights in joint family properties.
The presumption of joint family status in Hindu law requires clear evidence to establish prior partition; the Appellate Court allowed partition of one property acquired post-partition while dismissin....
Suit for partition - plaintiffs can have no right to seek partition of the 3rd item property. While the 2nd defendant as the owner of the property had sold the property to 3rd defendant. After receiv....
The court affirmed that the recitals in registered sale deeds are pivotal evidence, prohibiting oral contradictions under Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, thereby establishing the ancestral nat....
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
