Case Note & Summary
The appellants, five sisters, filed a suit for partition and separate possession of a property situated at Village Manor, Taluka Palghar, District Thane, claiming that the property was joint family property of their father, Abbas Bharmal, and his brothers. The respondents, who were the brothers and their descendants, contended that the property was self-acquired by the father of the respondents and not joint family property. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the appellants failed to prove that the property was joint family property and that the suit was barred by limitation. The High Court, on appeal, upheld the trial court's findings. The court noted that the appellants did not produce any evidence to show that the property was acquired with joint family funds or that they were in possession of the property within 12 years prior to the suit. The court also observed that the appellants' father had separated from the joint family long ago and had no share in the property. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Hindu Law - Joint Family Property - Presumption - Property held by a member of a joint Hindu family is presumed to be joint family property unless proved otherwise - The burden lies on the party claiming it to be self-acquired to prove that it was acquired without the aid of joint family funds - In the present case, the appellants failed to discharge this burden (Paras 10-15). B) Partition - Suit for Partition - Limitation - Article 110 of the Limitation Act, 1963 - A suit for partition by a person excluded from possession must be filed within 12 years from the date of exclusion - The appellants' suit was filed beyond the period of limitation as they were not in possession of the suit property for more than 12 years prior to the suit (Paras 16-20). C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 101 - Burden of Proof - The appellants, as plaintiffs, had the burden to prove their title and that the property was joint family property - They failed to produce any documentary evidence to show that the property was acquired by their predecessor-in-interest without the aid of joint family funds (Paras 10-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit property was joint family property or self-acquired property of the appellants' predecessor-in-interest, and whether the appellants were entitled to a decree for partition and separate possession.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed with costs. The trial court's decree dismissing the suit for partition is upheld.
Law Points
- Partition
- Joint Family Property
- Burden of Proof
- Self-Acquired Property
- Hindu Succession Act
- 1956
