Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vardhaman Lengade, was defendant No.2 in a partition suit filed by respondent No.1, Sital Lengade, and others. The suit sought partition of joint family properties including a business named M/s Prashant Metals. The trial court decreed partition, holding that the properties were joint family properties. The appellant appealed, arguing that the business was his separate property. The High Court, after hearing arguments and reviewing evidence, found that the plaintiff had established the existence of joint family nucleus and that the defendant failed to prove that the business was acquired without joint family funds. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's decree.
Headnote
A) Hindu Law - Joint Family Property - Partition - Burden of Proof - The plaintiff sought partition of joint family properties including a business establishment. The defendant claimed the business was his separate property. The court held that the plaintiff proved the existence of joint family nucleus and the defendant failed to prove that the business was acquired without the aid of joint family funds. The trial court's decree for partition was upheld. (Paras 3-10)
B) Civil Procedure - Appeal - Section 96 CPC - Regular First Appeal - The appellant-defendant challenged the judgment and decree of the trial court. The High Court, on reappreciation of evidence, found no perversity in the trial court's findings and dismissed the appeal. (Paras 1-2, 11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit schedule properties, including the business establishment M/s Prashant Metals, are joint family properties liable for partition, and whether the trial court erred in decreeing partition of the business.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree dated 28.07.2018 passed in O.S.No.325/2016 on the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi, is confirmed.
Law Points
- Partition
- Joint Family Property
- Burden of Proof
- Separate Property
- Hindu Succession Act
- 1956
- Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
- Section 96
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (04) 54
Regular First Appeal No.100426 of 2018
H.P.Sandesh, B. Muralidhara Pai
Sri Mallikarjunswamy B. Hiremath (for appellant), Sri Suresh S. Gundi (for respondent 1)
Vardhaman S/o. Tavanappa Lengade
Sital S/o. Bharamappa Lengade and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Regular First Appeal against judgment and decree in a partition suit.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought modification of the trial court's judgment and decree by setting aside the decree insofar as it related to the business establishment M/s Prashant Metals.
Filing Reason
Appellant was defendant No.2 in the suit and aggrieved by the trial court's decree for partition of the business.
Previous Decisions
Trial court (II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi) decreed the suit on 28.07.2018 in O.S.No.325/2016, ordering partition of suit schedule properties including the business.
Issues
Whether the business establishment M/s Prashant Metals is a joint family property liable for partition?
Whether the trial court erred in decreeing partition of the business?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the business was his separate property, not joint family property.
Respondent argued that the business was part of the joint family properties and liable for partition.
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff proved the existence of joint family nucleus and the defendant failed to prove that the business was acquired without the aid of joint family funds. Therefore, the business is joint family property liable for partition.
Judgment Excerpts
Defendant No.2 in O.S.No.325/2016 on the file of learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi has maintained this regular appeal against the judgment and decree dated 28.07.2018 passed therein, praying to modify the judgment and decree by setting aside the judgment and decree passed insofar as business establishment in the name and style of M/s Prashant Metals.
The parties to this appeal are hereinafter referred with their original ranking before the trial Court.
Procedural History
The suit O.S.No.325/2016 was filed before the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi, which decreed the suit on 28.07.2018. The defendant No.2 filed Regular First Appeal No.100426/2018 before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. The appeal was heard and reserved for judgment on 12.03.2026, and judgment was pronounced on 28.04.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 96
