Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J
Shanmugapriya – Appellant
Versus
Kandasamy, Arulmurugan, Chitra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and case details (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 2. court’s analysis on partition and property characterization under hindu law (Para 6 , 10 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. key legal issues framed for determination (Para 7) |
| 4. parties’ contentions on ancestral vs self-acquired property (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Unsuccessful plaintiff has preferred the appeal. The suit is filed for partition. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The parties are referred as per their ranking in the trial Court.
2. The brief case of the plaintiff is as follows:
The plaintiff is the daughter of the first defendant. The first defendant has married one Pavayee as second wife, since the first wife died without any issues. The defendants 2 & 3 are the children of the defendant and the said Pavayee. After death of the said Pavayee, the first defendant has married one Shanthi as third wife. The plaintiff is the daughter of the said Shanthi and the first defendant. Hence, the plaintiff, defendants 2 & 3 are the legal heirs of the first defendant. One portion of the suit schedule property is ancestral property of the first defendant's family. With regard to the said property
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
