Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 75

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY
Elumalai @ Venkatesan – Appellant
Versus
M. Kamala – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Iyer, Adv. Mr. Rakesh R. Sharma, Adv. Mr. P. V. Yogeswaran, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Jayanth Muth Raj, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Malavika Jayanth, AOR Miss. Miranda Solaman, Adv. Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The Release Deed executed by Chandran was void because he held only a potential right to the property; (!) (!) - The property was the separate property of Sengalani Chettiar and vested to the heirs only upon his death in 1988; (!) (!) - The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the Release Deed did not transfer any right; (!) - Estoppel arose from Chandran’s receipt of valuable consideration for the Release Deed, preventing him and his heirs from claiming any right to the property; (!) (!) (!) - The appellants, as Class‑I heirs under the Hindu Succession Act, could have a claim, but estoppel bars that claim in this case; (!) (!) (!)

What is the effect of a Release Deed executed by an heir apparent in relation to a separate property of the parent?

What are the rights of the children of a pre‑deceased son to inherit the separate property of their grandfather under the Hindu Succession Act?

How does the principle of estoppel impact the inheritance rights when the heir apparent has executed a Release Deed in consideration?

JUDGMENT :

K.M. JOSEPH, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. One Shri Sengalani Chettiar was married to one Rukmini. The said marriage produced a son, namely, Shri Chandran. The appellants are the sons of Shri Chandran. Sengalani Chettiar married again this time with one Smt. Kuppammal. From the second marriage Sengalani Chettiar had 5 daughters and a son. The controversy in this case relates to A-Schedule property in the suit for partition filed by two children out of the 6 children born to Sengelani Chettiar from his second marriage. The property in dispute was the self-acquired property of Shri Sengalani Chettiar. In regard to the said property, Chandran,the father of the appellants had executed a Release Deed. The terms of the Release Deed dated 12.11.1975, are as follows :

THIS DEED OF RELEASE is executed on the 12th day of November, 1975 in favour of 1. C.Sengalani Chettiar, son of Singara Chettiar, residing at No.144, Venkatachala Mudali Street Meersapet, Mylapore, Chennai, 2. Sengalani Chettiar, as the guardian of his minor son, Vinayagarnurthy, aged about 2 years, this deed executed by S.Chandran, son of Sengalani Chettiar, residing at No.19, Santha Sahib Street, Meersapet, Mylapore, Chen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 75

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROYElumalai @ Venkatesan – AppellantVersusM. Kamala – Respondent

What is the effect of a Release Deed executed by an heir apparent in relation to a separate property of the parent?

What are the rights of the children of a pre‑deceased son to inherit the separate property of their grandfather under the Hindu Succession Act?

How does the principle of estoppel impact the inheritance rights when the heir apparent has executed a Release Deed in consideration?

Cases Referred (1)

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY
Elumalai @ Venkatesan – Appellant
Versus
M. Kamala – Respondent