District Judiciary Retirement Age | Supreme Court Directs Enhancement To 62 Years To Arrest Attrition Of Judicial Talent Slogans Inciting Armed Rebellion Or Challenging Sovereignty Cannot Be Equated With Religious Expressions: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail Revisional Authority Under AP ROR Act Has Jurisdiction To Direct Inquiry Into Illegal Transfers Of Assigned Land: Andhra Pradesh High Court Indian Law Does Not Recognise 'Joint Parenting' As A Statutory Concept; Child Welfare Remains Paramount: Bombay High Court Order 26 Rule 9 CPC | Court Must Appoint Survey-Knowing Commissioner In Suits Alleging Physical Encroachment And Boundary Disputes: Calcutta High Court Section 33-C(2) ID Act | Labour Court Has Jurisdiction To Recover Consequential Benefits Arising From CAT Orders: Delhi High Court Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) CPC | Procedural Law Is Meant For Advancement Of Justice; Technicalities Should Not Scuttle Opportunity To Lead Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court High Court Can Condition Condonation Of Delay In Land Acquisition Appeals Upon Waiver Of Interest For Delayed Period: Bombay High Court Employees Compensation Act | Insurance Company Not Liable To Indemnify Penalty Imposed On Employer Under Section 4-A(3)(b): Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees’ Compensation Act | Failure To Frame Issue On Employer-Employee Relationship Vitiates Commissioner’s Award: Kerala High Court Default Bail Under Section 187 BNSS | Period Of Investigation Depends On Substance Of Allegations In FIR, Not Merely Mentioned Sections: Madhya Pradesh High Court SARFAESI Act | Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Must Be Challenged Under Section 17 Before DRT, Not Via Writ Petition: Kerala High Court

No Bar U/S 10 C.P.C. - Upholds Right to File Subsequent Partition Suit for Left-Out Properties: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment has underscored the right to file subsequent partition suits for properties not included in the previous suit. The ruling, delivered by Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, addressed the issue of whether a suit filed for the partition of properties left out of the previous partition suit could be kept in abeyance under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).

Justice Singh's observations emphasized the importance of this legal principle, stating, "It is made clear that even though the parties to the suit are the same, the other necessary conditions also need to be met for the applicability of the said section in the subsequent suit."

The judgment highlighted that the mere inclusion of some properties in the original partition suit does not automatically include all properties left by the deceased. Justice Singh noted, "The non-inclusion of some of the properties in the original partition suit filed before any Court of competent jurisdiction will not automatically include all the properties left by the deceased in the original partition suit."

This ruling reaffirms the legal position that partial partition of properties is not strictly prohibited and can be allowed under certain circumstances. It further establishes that a suit for partition should embrace all properties left by a deceased, but the non-inclusion of certain properties grants the right to the aggrieved party to file a subsequent suit for the left-out properties.

Delhi High Court has clarified the legal framework surrounding partition suits and the conditions under which they can be filed. It underscores the need for a thorough examination of the facts and law before invoking Section 10 of the CPC to stay a subsequent suit, ensuring that justice prevails in matters of property partition.

Date of Decision: 20 October 2023

KUMARI LAXMI VS RAMA DEVI & ORS     

Latest Legal News