Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.23 seconds)The Hindu Succession Act, 1956
The Registration Act, 1908
Sri B Appanna Reddy Since Decd By Lrs vs Sri S B Narayana Reddy S/O Late Boda Reddy on 21 January, 2010
"15. In the present case, the preliminary decree was passed on 11-8-1992. The first appeal was dismissed on 20-3-1998 and the second appeal was dismissed on 1-10-1999 as barred by limitation. By the preliminary decree, shares of the parties were determined but the actual partition/division had not taken place. Therefore, the proceedings of the suit instituted by Respondent 1 cannot be treated to have become final so far as the actual partition of the joint family properties is concerned and in view of the law laid down in Phoolchand v. Gopal Lal and S. Sai Reddy v. S. Narayana Reddy4, it was open to the appellant to claim enhancement of her share in the joint family properties because she had not married till the enforcement of Karnataka Act 23 of 1994. Section 6-A of Karnataka Act 23 of 1994 is identical to Section 29-A of the Andhra Pradesh Act.
Phoolchand And Anr vs Gopal Lal on 10 March, 1967
"15. In the present case, the preliminary decree was passed on 11-8-1992. The first appeal was dismissed on 20-3-1998 and the second appeal was dismissed on 1-10-1999 as barred by limitation. By the preliminary decree, shares of the parties were determined but the actual partition/division had not taken place. Therefore, the proceedings of the suit instituted by Respondent 1 cannot be treated to have become final so far as the actual partition of the joint family properties is concerned and in view of the law laid down in Phoolchand v. Gopal Lal and S. Sai Reddy v. S. Narayana Reddy4, it was open to the appellant to claim enhancement of her share in the joint family properties because she had not married till the enforcement of Karnataka Act 23 of 1994. Section 6-A of Karnataka Act 23 of 1994 is identical to Section 29-A of the Andhra Pradesh Act.
Section 6 in The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Karnataka Prohibition Act, 1961
Section 8 in The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2003
Ganduri Koteshwaramma & Anr vs Chakiri Yanadi & Anr on 12 October, 2011
26. On balance, the judgments of the Division Benches are not in concinnity with the dictum as found exemplified and laid down in the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ganduri's case and Prema's case. Hence I am bound to follow only the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court. In view of the Apex Court's precedents, the issue is no more res integra.