Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.Balaji, J
Ganesan – Appellant
Versus
Thangammal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties roles and appeal background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 11) |
| 2. substantial questions on admissions and shares. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. facts, issues, trial evidence, and lower court findings. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. counsel arguments on admissions and self-acquisition. (Para 13) |
| 5. burden of proof and s.14 hsa application. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. appeal dismissed, decree confirmed. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs in a suit for partition, aggrieved by the reversal findings rendered by the first appellate Court, are the appellants herein.
2. I have heard Mr.J.Barathan, learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs.V.Sundari, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.
4. The second appeal was admitted by me on 23.03.2026, on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether the first Appellate Court was right in reversing the findings of the trial Court in respect of item Nos.15 to 19, ignoring the vital admissions made by the respondents regarding the existence of the joint family nucleus?
5. After hearing the learned counsel, on 22.04.2026, the following substantial question of law was framed
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
