Overloading Isn't Negligence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Slaps Full Liability On Insurer, Enhances Compensation In Motor Accident Case Coparcener Can Orally Relinquish Share In Ancestral Property Without Registered Deed, But Mere Name Deletion From Revenue Records Not Relinquishment: Bombay High Court 'Cannot Insist On Threshold Adjudication Of Res Judicata In Small Causes Court': Allahabad HC Upholds Summary Procedure, Dismisses Petition Cannot Convert Specific Performance Suit Into Title Dispute: Calcutta High Court Refuses To Implead Third-Party Claimant Section 139 NI Act Presumption Triggered For Post-Dated Cheques Issued Under Settlement Agreements, Cannot Quash Summons Claiming 'No Existing Debt': Delhi High Court Motive Loses Significance Where Direct Ocular Evidence Is Reliable: Gauhati High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Jharkhand High Court Quashes Reinstatement Award For Workman Accused Of Threatening Senior With Revolver Absolute Non-Application Of Mind: Kerala High Court Quashes KAAPA Detention Order Passed In Ignorance Of Prior Judicial Quashing Ruling Payment Under Protest Is Not A Concluded Settlement: Madras High Court Upholds ₹3.25 Cr Arbitral Award Against Madras Fertilizers Benami Plea Cannot Kill A Suit At The Threshold: Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Suit For Partition Of 'Family Property' Presumption Of Innocence Gets Concretized: Orissa High Court Refuses To Reverse 30-Year-Old Acquittal Cannot Keep Accused In Jail For Inordinate Period By Taking Refuge In Section 37 NDPS: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail In Commercial Quantity Heroin Case No Coparcenary Right By Birth In Ancestral Property Devolving Under Section 8': Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Plea Article 21 Violated: Madras High Court Says Constitutional Courts Must Undo Wrongful Life Imprisonment Of Juveniles, Frees Man Jailed For 25 Years Expert In Medical Negligence Cases Must Be Qualified In Relevant Speciality: Telangana High Court Quashes Consumer Forum Orders Denying Independent Neurosurgical Opinion Supreme Court Issues Sweeping Guidelines to Combat Systemic Delays in Dowry Death Trials Resisting Medical Exam Is Not A Crime: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Forest Department Official Victim Has Unbridled Right To Participate: Calcutta High Court Directs Supply Of Case Documents Under BNSS

“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