Back
SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
G. Krishna Murhty – Appellant
Versus
G. K. Prabhakar – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
Defendant No.1 in O.S.No.401 of 2013 on the file of the XIX Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, has filed this first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘C.P.C.’) assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 01.03.2017 passed by the trial Court in the subject suit whereunder the trial Court had passed a decree in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs for partition of the schedule mentioned property.
2. For the sake of convenience and also for better understanding, the parties will be referred in the same ranking in which they are arrayed before the trial Court.
3. As could be seen from the material available on record, the plaintiffs have filed the subject suit against defendant Nos.1 to 3 seeking partition of the schedule mentioned property i.e., House bearing door Nos.6-5-453 to 455, admeasuring 96.44 square yards. As per the averments made in the plaint, the plaintiffs have claimed that the plaintiffs, defendant No.1 and one Sri Devraj are the sons of Mr.G.Krishna Murthy and Smt.Santhamma. Defendant No.3 is the wife of the said Sri Devaraj, who was no more by the time of filing of the suit.
4. The plaintiffs have claimed that
The court clarified the application of Sections 14(1) and 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, emphasizing the need to include all rightful heirs in partition suits.
The plaintiff, as the legatee of Lakshmidevamma under the Will, stands in the place of Lakshmidevamma. Lakshmidevamma was entitled to be treated as a regular coparcener of the Hindu joint family orig....
The court affirmed that partition shares from ancestral property remain joint family property for descendants, entitling them to assert claims over the inherited property.
The mother of a deceased Hindu male is a Class-I heir and entitled to a share in the property left by the deceased. Her legal heirs are also entitled to a share after her death.
Previous family partition and lack of joint family status preclude the plaintiff from claiming coparcenary rights under Hindu law amendments.
The court affirmed that ancestral property remains so despite partition, and daughters are entitled to equal shares under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended.
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
