SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 54795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.Kumaresh Babu, J
A.Jagadeesan – Appellant
Versus
A.Srinivasan – Respondent
C.S.No.85 of 2024|OA.Nos.277 & 279 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.J.Adinarayanan
For the Respondents: Mr.J.D.Srikanth Varma, Mr.M.Venkata Krishnan, Mr.J.Praveen Kumar

Mutual acknowledgment of property rights among siblings necessitates court intervention for equitable partition and sharing of property.

Headnote:This judgment concerns a civil suit for partition and separate possession of properties among siblings, derived from agreements in written statements that acknowledge mutual rights over the properties. The court determined that, as no disputes existed regarding their identities or shares, a preliminary decree would confirm each party's 1/5th entitlement. The court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to demarcate and suggest a fair division of the properties, ordering equal cost sharing among the parties. The final decree outlined these terms while dismissing any claims against a lessee.

Table of Content
1. joint claim for property partition. (Para 1 , 2)
2. admitted rights among parties. (Para 3 , 4)
3. undisputed necessity for partition and appointment of commissioner. (Para 5)
4. court declarations on share entitlements. (Para 6)
5. final orders for equitable division and dismissal of lessee claims. (Para 7)

J U D G M E N T

The present suit is filed for partition and separate possession of the Suit Schedule Properties among the siblings, who are the parties to this suit.

2. The plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 are siblings. The plaintiff claims that he is entitled to a 1/5th share in the Suit Schedule Properties, which have devolved upon the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 by way of inheritance from their parents. The suit properties are the self-acquired properties of their father and mother. The fifth defendant is a lessee in occupation of Schedule 'C'

property.

3. Defendants 1 to 4 have acknowledged the relationship among the parties and have also admitted their respective rights over the Suit Schedule Properties. They have prayed for the passing of a Preliminary Decree, declaring each of them, including the plaintiff, entitled to a 1/5th undivided share in the Suit Schedule Properties.

4. For better appreciation the relevant para from the written statement are extracted hereunder:

Written statement of the First Defendant:

Para No.7 and Unnumbered para “...7.The first defendant states that except for the above stated just demands the first defendant is ready and willing to consent for a preliminary decree to partition of the properties such as his dwelling house, the “A” Schedule property, “C” Schedule property at Arni, Tiruvannamalai District, “D” Schedule property at Arni Town, “E” Schedule property at Melputhupakkam Village, “F” Schedule property at Arni “H” SBI Life Insurance amount into 5 equal shares and grant 1/5th share to this defendant. The “B” Schedule property and the 10 sovereigns of jewellery from the “G” Schedule movables, may be granted to this defendant apart from the 1/5 share of the remaining available jewellery..

It is therefore prayed this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a decree granting 1/5 share to this defendant as above stated and grant such or other orders or necessary releifs as it may require in the circumstances of this case...”

Written statement of the Second Defendant:

Para No.5 and Unnumbered para “… 5.The second defendant is hereby willing to consent to the passing of preliminary decree declaring 1/5 share to this defendant....

It is therefore prayed this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a decree granting 1/5 share to this defendant...”

Written Statement of the third defendant:

Para No.2 “…2.This defendant admits the averments made in para 7 to 9 of the plaint regaring the details of the parents and relationship between the parties are generally true. This defendant further states that there is no dispute regarding identity of the properties available for partition and entitlement of the each party in the suit schedule mentioned properties. Hence this defendant most respectfully pray that this Hon'ble may be pleased to pass a preliminary decree declaring the shares and appoint an Advocate Commissioner to prepare a report for division of the suit schedule properties and allotment of the same to the defendant...”

Written Statement of the Fourth defendant:

Para No.2 “...2.This defendant admits the averments made in para 7 to 9 of the plaint regarding the details of the parents and relationship between the parties are generally true. This defendant further states that there is no dispute regarding identity of the properties available for partition and entitlement of the respective sharers...”

5. Upon perusal of the pleadings and submissions made by both parties, it is evident that there exists no dispute on any material question of law or fact between the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4. The only point of divergence pertains to the manner of division of the suit schedule properties amo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top