Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Supreme Court Settles Family Property Dispute: Upholds 1984 Partition and Sale Deed, Overturns High Court’s Reliance on Alleged 1965 Partition"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court in its recent judgment addressed a complex family property dispute, focusing on the validity of the 1984 partition and the legality of a subsequent sale deed. The Court critically examined the earlier reliance on an alleged 1965 oral partition and its implications on the property rights among the family members.

The dispute revolved around the partition and entitlement to various properties within a family. The plaintiffs claimed a share in the properties, asserting an oral partition in 1965. The defendants, on the other hand, pointed to a 1984 partition that allegedly allocated the properties in question. The key issues involved the validity of these partitions and the legality of a sale deed executed by one of the defendants for a property allegedly part of the family assets.

On the Alleged 1965 Partition: The Supreme Court noted that reliance on the 1965 oral partition by the High Court was erroneous as it was not originally part of the plaintiffs' pleadings. An attempt to amend the plaint to include this partition was rejected, lending no basis for considering evidence related to the 1965 partition.

On the Validity of the 1984 Partition: The Court upheld the validity of the 1984 partition, noting that the properties in question were allotted to the branch of Raghvendrarao, the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants. This decision was reinforced by the absence of challenges to the 1984 partition in subsequent legal proceedings.

On the Sale of Property: The Supreme Court upheld the sale deed executed in 2001 concerning one of the disputed properties. It was found that the sale did not violate any interim order, as the seller was not a party to the suit when the interim order was passed.

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's findings regarding the disputed properties. The properties were declared rightfully belonging to the appellants, and the 2001 sale deed was upheld.

Date of Decision: 4th March 2024

Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai (Dead) by LRs. Vs. V. Kumar Vamanrao @ Alok and Ors.

 

Latest Legal News