Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Partition Suit — Clarifies Shares in Ancestral Property. The court determined that the plaintiffs were entitled to one-sixth share each in the ancestral property, with the remaining share going to the adopted son, Nemi Chand, based on the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a partition suit filed by the respondents seeking a two-third share in ancestral properties after the death of Nagar Mal, who had adopted Nemi Chand. The trial court erroneously granted an ex-parte decree for one-third share to each plaintiff instead of one-sixth. The appellate authority reversed this but remitted the matter, leading to a decision by the Board of Revenue that restored the trial court's decree. The High Court upheld this decision, prompting the current appeal. The Supreme Court examined Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as it stood before the 2005 amendment, which governs the devolution of interest in coparcenary property. The court emphasized the need for a notional partition to determine the deceased's interest, which would then devolve upon the heirs. It clarified that the plaintiffs, being daughters, were entitled to one-sixth share each, while the adopted son would inherit the remaining property. The appeal was allowed, and the previous judgments were set aside, leading to a decree for partition reflecting the correct shares. The court also dismissed a related writ petition without costs.

Headnote

A) Hindu Law - Mitakshara Coparcenary - Devolution of Interest - Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Section 6 - The court held that upon the death of a coparcener, the undivided interest in the Mitakshara coparcenary property devolves upon heirs by intestate succession rather than by survivorship, necessitating a notional partition to ascertain shares. The plaintiffs were entitled to one-sixth share each, with the remaining property going to the adopted son, Nemi Chand (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to one-third share or one-sixth share in the ancestral property after the death of Nagar Mal.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgments, and decreed the suit for partition to the extent of one-sixth share for each of the two plaintiffs, with the remaining properties going to the heirs of Nemi Chand.

Law Points

  • Hindu Law
  • Mitakshara coparcenary
  • intestate succession
  • notional partition
  • ancestral property
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (SC) (09) 85

Civil Appeal No. 4171 of 2006

2006-09-18

B.N. Agrawal, P.P. Naolekar

Anar Devi and Ors

Parmeshwari Devi and Ors

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Partition suit regarding ancestral property

Remedy Sought

Partition of suit properties and determination of shares

Filing Reason

Claim for two-third share in ancestral properties

Previous Decisions

Trial court's ex-parte decree for one-third share reversed by appellate authority, remitted to Board of Revenue, which restored trial court's decree.

Issues

Entitlement of plaintiffs to one-third share versus one-sixth share in ancestral property Application of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act regarding devolution of interest

Submissions/Arguments

Plaintiffs argued for a two-third share based on ancestral rights. Defendants contended that the correct share should be one-sixth based on the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court clarified that under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, the undivided interest of a deceased coparcener devolves upon heirs by intestate succession, necessitating a notional partition to ascertain shares.

Judgment Excerpts

The court held that upon the death of a coparcener, the undivided interest in the Mitakshara coparcenary property devolves upon heirs by intestate succession rather than by survivorship. Each of the two plaintiffs was not entitled to one-third share in the suit property, but one-sixth.

Procedural History

The trial court passed an ex-parte decree for partition, which was reversed by the appellate authority and remitted. The Board of Revenue restored the trial court's decree, which was upheld by the High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Section 6
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Complaint in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — High Court's Quashing of Complaints Reversed.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Consumer Commission Order Directing Builder to Refund Amount with Interest in Flat Possession Delay Case. Builder's Appeal Dismissed as Subsequent Purchaser Entitled to Interest from Deposit Dates Under Consumer Protection Act, ...