Search Results for "Joint Hindu Family"

720 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 720 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeals in Property Dispute, Upholds Trial Court's Partial Decree for Declaration, Injunction, and Partition. Appellants failed to prove title and possession over suit property, and trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence under Section 96 CPC.

The case involves two Regular First Appeals filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree dated 26.02.2...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit Involving Tenancy Rights of Joint Hindu Family. Tenancy rights in suit property held not to be joint family property and not liable for partition.

The case involves a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the defendant-appellant against the judgment and de...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Section 9 Petition for Interim Relief in Family Settlement Dispute. Court grants status quo order to protect assets pending arbitration under family settlement agreement.

The petitioner, Mukesh J. Shah, filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim relief pe...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit, Upholds Concurrent Findings of Lower Courts. Family Arrangement and Benami Transaction Allegations Rejected as Property Purchased by Deceased from Own Earnings and Joint Family Income.

The case involves a partition suit filed by the wife and children of the deceased Macchhindra against his brothers (appellants). The plaintiffs sought...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Finds Substantial Question of Law on Adverse Possession and Limitation. Court holds that the first appellate court failed to properly consider the plea of adverse possession and limitation, and remands the matter for fresh consideration.

The case involves a second appeal arising from a partition suit. The appellants, original plaintiffs, filed a suit for partition and separate possessi...