MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Plaintiff’s Consent and Receipt of Compensation Nullify Right to Property Claim: Telangana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Partition Suit

01 November 2024 5:49 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Telangana High Court upheld the dismissal of a partition suit filed by M. Prema Latha. The court ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled to a share in her late father's property, as she had already acknowledged the existence of a valid Will and had accepted compensation in 2005. The plaintiff's failure to challenge the Will or the development agreement over two decades was seen as her tacit consent, disqualifying her from later seeking a share.
Prema Latha, the daughter of Jaligama Balaiah, filed a partition suit against her brothers, seeking her share in a property located in Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. She claimed a 1/6th share in the property, which had been divided among her four brothers based on a 1997 Will. The trial court dismissed the suit, leading to this appeal.
Plaintiff's Consent and Will Acknowledgment: The court noted that Prema Latha had signed the development agreement in 2005, acknowledging the Will that divided the property among her brothers and excluded her. The plaintiff also admitted to receiving compensation, which implied relinquishment of her rights.
Failure to Challenge Will and Development Agreement: The court emphasized that Prema Latha neither challenged the Will nor the development agreement for over 20 years. Her inaction and acceptance of compensation indicated her consent to the arrangement.
Lack of Evidence for Fraud or Forgery: The plaintiff argued that the first three pages of the Will were forged. However, she provided no evidence to substantiate this claim, and the court found the Will to be valid.
The Telangana High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the trial court's decision that Prema Latha had no claim to the property. The court ruled that her actions and inaction over the years amounted to her relinquishment of any property rights.
This ruling underscores the importance of timely action and clear challenges when disputing Wills or property arrangements. It also highlights that accepting compensation can imply consent to relinquishing property rights, making later claims invalid.

Date of Decision: October 3, 2024
M. Prema Latha v. Jaligama Prakash & Others.

 

Latest Legal News