Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.38 seconds)
Documents citing Venkalakshmi Ammal And Ors. vs Jagannathan (Minor) And Ors. on 19 June, 1961

Varala Ravinder, vs Smt.Ananthamma Vippapoovula Lakshmi, on 29 February, 2024

In Venkalakshmi Ammal's case (8th cited supra), the High Court of Madras at Para 48 of its judgment held that it is well settled that proof of the existence of a joint family does not lead to the presumption that property held by any member is joint and the burden rests upon anyone asserting that any item of property was joint to establish the fact, but where it is established that the family possessed some joint property which from its nature and value may have formed the nucleus from which the property in question may have been acquired, burden shifts to the party alleging self- acquisition to establish affirmatively that the property was acquired without the aid of the joint family property.
Telangana High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Varala Shobha vs Smt.Ananthamma Vippapoovula Lakshmi on 29 February, 2024

In Venkalakshmi Ammal's case (8th cited supra), the High Court of Madras at Para 48 of its judgment held that it is well settled that proof of the existence of a joint family does not lead to the presumption that property held by any member is joint and the burden rests upon anyone asserting that any item of property was joint to establish the fact, but where it is established that the family possessed some joint property which from its nature and value may have formed the nucleus from which the property in question may have been acquired, burden shifts to the party alleging self- acquisition to establish affirmatively that the property was acquired without the aid of the joint family property.
Telangana High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhima Kotha Dalai And Ors. vs Sarat Chandra Kotha Dalai And Ors. on 27 January, 1987

The Madras High Court in the case of Venkalakshmi Ammal v. Jagannathan. AIR 1963 Mad 316, observed that under the Hindu Law of adoption in the Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara school as it was interpreted prior to the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the validity of an adoption depended on the theory of spiritual benefit which was the guiding principle before the commencement of the said Act of 1956. According to this principle the widow of a predeceased son (the daughter-in-law) can validly adopt a son to her husband after the death of the father-in-law who had himself left a widow alive on the date of the adoption. The argument advanced on behalf of the widow of the father who had herself taken a son in adoption to her husband that although there was the interposition of son's widow, the father being alive, the duty to continue the line still with him, and never passed on to his son, and after his death, to his widow, was an deeper consideration rejected.
Orissa High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - D P Mohapatra - Full Document
1