Triple Riding On Motorcycle Not Automatic Proof Of Contributory Negligence; High Court Can Enhance Award Even Without Cross-Appeal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Statutory Power To Lay Electricity Lines Prevails Over Private Land Claims; Landowners Entitled To Compensation, Not Obstruction: Bombay High Court Beer & Whisky Are Allied/Cognate Goods; Use Of Identical Mark For Spirits Infringes 'Godfather' Beer Trademark: Delhi High Court Minimum Percentile Fixed By Indian Nursing Council For B.Sc. Nursing Admissions Must Be Strictly Adhered To; Cannot Be Diluted Without Approval: Calcutta High Court Bride Not Expected To Keep All Gold In Personal Custody In Matrimonial Home; Entrustment To Husband Presumed: Kerala High Court Default Imprisonment Not Additional Punishment But Coercive Measure To Secure Fine; Cannot Become 'De Facto' Debtors' Prison: Karnataka High Court Mahant Is Only A Custodian Of Deity’s Property, Assets Gifted For Temple Maintenance Belong To Public Trust: Gujarat High Court Pendency Of Criminal Antecedents Alone Not A Ground To Deny Bail: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail In Abduction Case After 3-Year Delay In FIR Beer Falls Under ‘IMFL’ Category; No Obligation To Collect TCS On Sales Prior To June 2003: Telangana High Court Dismissal From Service For Negligence Without Proved Misappropriation Is Disproportionate: Orissa High Court Merit In A Case Does Not Justify Disregarding Statutory Delay: NCDRC Upholds Dismissal Of Star Health's Appeal Filed With 442-Day Delay Limitation Period Under Section 34(3) Arbitration Act Commences Only From Receipt Of Signed Copy Of Award: Madhya Pradesh High Court Government Employee Not Eligible For Regular Promotion During Pendency Of Vigilance Proceeding: Orissa High Court Arrest Warrants Against Directors Under Section 72 CP Act Should Be Last Resort; Proper Procedure Must Be Followed: NCDRC

“Division Consistent With Legal Provisions”: Supreme Court Affirms Decision on Mitakshara Coparcenary Property

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court of India, in a landmark judgment dated September 1, 2023, under the bench of Justices C.T. RAVIKUMAR and SANJAY KUMAR, dismissed a special leave appeal that revolved around the complex issue of Mitakshara coparcenary property. The apex court observed that the “division is consistent with legal provisions,” upholding the High Court’s decision.

The case has its roots in Civil Suit No. 146A of 1991, filed following Kesar Bai’s request for partition of properties. After her demise, the appellant, Derha Ram, succeeded her estate and was initially granted a 1/3rd share in agricultural lands and house properties. Though an Appellate Court upheld this share, the High Court later revised it to 1/6th, based on Sections 6 and 8 of the Hindu Succession Act of 1956.

The judgment also cited previous cases like Gurupad Khandappa Magdum and Shyama Devi, emphasizing that “the principles in Gurupad Khandappa Magdum and others have been duly considered.”

Rejecting the appellant’s argument that the properties were not coparcenary in nature, the Court stated such a position was “inconsistent with the original plaintiff’s pleadings.”

This ruling is expected to have far-reaching consequences, especially in matters of succession and Mitakshara coparcenary properties. Legal experts predict that this judgment will serve as an important reference for similar cases going forward.

The complete judgment is available for public scrutiny, providing an in-depth look at the Court’s legal reasoning and conclusions.

Date of Decision: September 1, 2023

DERHA vs VISHAL & ANR.

Latest Legal News