Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dr. G.Jayachandran, J
Soundiram – Appellant
Versus
Annapoornai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of properties claimed in partition. (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. evidence of property acquisition from family nucleus. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments regarding validity of property titles. (Para 12 , 13 , 16) |
| 4. court’s assertion on validity of self-acquisition claims. (Para 18 , 20 , 22) |
J U D G M E N T
The suit for partition filed by the appellant against her father and brother was dismissed by the trial Court, holding that the suit properties are self acquired property of her father, the first defendant. Hence, the settlement of his self-acquired property in favour of his son, the second defendant is valid and cannot be assailed.
2. The appellant, challenging the dismissal of the suit, has preferred the appeal.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as per their status and ranking in the plaint.
4 . C ase of the plaintiff:
The first defendant is the plaintiff's father and the second defendant is her brother. The first defendant and one Illayappan are brothers. On 12.09.1977, there was partition among the coparceners in respect of the ancestral property held by their parents, Nallaiah Gounder and Perumayee. Even before this partition, the first defendant and
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
