Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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