Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
G.RADHA RANI
Surajmal Panwar – Appellant
Versus
Shiv Pyario Bai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(G. RADHA RANI, J.)
Both these appeals are preferred by the appellants-defendants aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2019 in O.S. No.541 of 2008 passed by the XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
2. CCCA No.205 of 2019 was filed against the decree passed in favour of the respondent-plaintiff while CCCA No.228 of 2019 was preferred against the dismissal of the counter claim of the appellants- defendants.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed before the trial court.
4. O.S.No.541 of 2008 was filed by the respondent-plaintiff seeking to declare her as owner of the property bearing Municipal No.15-7-390, admeasuring 34.66 sq.yds., situated at Begum Bazar, Hyderabad and to direct the defendants to vacate and hand-over vacant possession of the said property. She claimed Rs.1,00,000/- towards past mesne profits and Rs.50,000/- per month for future mesne profits along with permanent injunction, restraining the defendants or anyone claiming through them from dealing with the suit property.
5. The case of the plaintiff was that her husband late Balkishan Panwar had purchased two mulgies bearing Municipal Nos.15
The court affirmed that the property was self-acquired by the plaintiff's husband, rejecting claims of joint family ownership due to lack of evidence.
The court reaffirmed that property registered in one person's name can be deemed joint family property if acquired with joint family funds, supported by notarized affidavits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that properties acquired from individual earnings of family members cannot be treated as joint family properties unless deliberate abandonment and ....
The presumption of joint family property exists unless the self-acquiring party proves acquisition from separate funds, reaffirming the shifting burden of proof.
The presumption of joint family property does not apply if the property is proven to be self-acquired; the burden of proof lies on the claimant of joint family property.
The burden of proof in partition suits lies with the plaintiff to establish joint family property, while unregistered sale agreements do not confer title and are inadmissible as evidence.
No presumption of joint family property from family existence; claimant must prove acquisition from joint nucleus fund, especially for properties in daughters-in-law names via separate sale deeds wit....
A Karta of a joint family can validly alienate property for legal necessity or benefit of the estate, binding all coparceners.
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
