Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court dismissed a chamber summons filed by a third-party applicant seeking impleadment in a partition suit. The suit involved partition of joint family properties owned by the parties. During the pendency of the suit, Defendant No.14, a coparcener, died, and his heirs (Defendant Nos. 14A to 14D) were brought on record but later dismissed for non-service. The applicant claimed to be the stepson of deceased Defendant No.14 and sought to be impleaded as a legal heir, also claiming a 1/9th share and stay of redevelopment. The court held that a stepchild is not a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and cannot claim any right to the joint family property of the deceased. The applicant's reliance on the definition of 'child' under the Income Tax Act was misplaced as that definition is limited to tax purposes. The court found no legal interest of the applicant in the suit property and dismissed the chamber summons with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Hindu Succession Act - Legal Heir - Stepchild - A stepchild is not a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and cannot claim a share in the joint family property of the deceased coparcener. The court held that the definition of 'child' under the Income Tax Act, 1961, is not relevant for determining succession rights. (Paras 4-5)
B) Civil Procedure Code - Impleadment - Order 1 Rule 10 - A third party seeking impleadment must have a direct legal interest in the subject matter of the suit. The applicant, being a stepchild, failed to establish any legal right to the property of the deceased defendant. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a stepchild of a deceased coparcener is entitled to be impleaded as a legal heir in a partition suit of joint family property.
Final Decision
Chamber Summons dismissed with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Stepchild is not a legal heir under Hindu Succession Act
- 1956
- Impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC requires legal interest
- Definition of 'child' under Income Tax Act not applicable to succession
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (01) 69
Chamber Summons No.495 of 2017 in Suit No.2219 of 2000 with Notice of Motion No.381 of 2015 in Suit No.2219 of 2000
Mr.Vansh Bahadur Sabhajeet Yadav (Applicant in person), Mr.Ramchandra Yadav with Mr. Netaji Gawade i/by Mr. Sanjay Udeshi and Company (for Plaintiff), Mr.Omar Khaiyam Shaikh with Mr. Chetan Mendadkar (for Defendant No.5), Mr.Satish Upadhyay (for Defendant No.6B), Ms.Madhumita S. Yadav i/by Mr. J.S.Yadav (for Defendant Nos.9 to 12), Mr.Rakesh K. Singh (for Defendant Nos.16 to 20), Mr. Vedchetan Patil (for Defendant No.21), Mr. Vijayshankar R. Yadav (C.A. of Defendant No.4 present in person)
Yansh Bahadur Sabhajeet Yadav
Dudhnath Kallu Yadav and ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Chamber summons for impleadment in a partition suit
Remedy Sought
Applicant sought impleadment as a legal heir of deceased Defendant No.14, a decree for separate share and possession of 1/9th share, and stay of redevelopment
Filing Reason
Applicant claimed to be stepson of deceased Defendant No.14 and entitled to be brought on record as a legal heir
Previous Decisions
Suit was ordered to be dismissed against unserved defendants including Defendant Nos.14A to 14D by order dated 12 December 2011; this fact was noted in order dated 3 November 2014
Issues
Whether a stepchild is a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and entitled to be impleaded in a partition suit of joint family property.
Submissions/Arguments
Applicant argued that he is a stepson of deceased Defendant No.14 and should be treated as a legal heir, relying on the definition of 'child' under Section 2(15B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Defendants opposed the application, contending that a stepchild is not a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act.
Ratio Decidendi
A stepchild is not a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and cannot claim any right to the joint family property of a deceased coparcener. The definition of 'child' under the Income Tax Act is not applicable for determining succession rights.
Judgment Excerpts
It is difficult to see how a stepson of deceased Defendant No.14 can be said to be a legal heir of the deceased entitled to defend the present suit, which is for partition of joint family property coowned by the deceased.
The definition of 'child' under the Income Tax Act cannot be imported into the law of succession.
Procedural History
Suit No.2219 of 2000 was filed for partition of joint family properties. During pendency, Defendant No.14 died and his heirs (14A to 14D) were added but later dismissed for non-service. The present Chamber Summons No.495 of 2017 was filed by a third party claiming to be stepson of deceased Defendant No.14 seeking impleadment and other reliefs.
Acts & Sections
- Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
- Income Tax Act, 1961: Section 2(15B)
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 1 Rule 10
