Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 24 (1.14 seconds)

Arshnoor Singh vs Harpal Kaur on 1 July, 2019

Besides, it is absolutely immaterial whether the sons were born to the inheritor before or after the inheritance fell in But if the property is inherited from a paternal ancestor beyond the third degree then the property is not ancestral as against the inheritor's sons, and the inheritor has absolute powers of disposal over it.” 14.5. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Arshnoor Singh Vs. Harpal Kaur and Ors. (cited supra), in paragraph Nos.7.3 to 7.6, held as follows:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 49 - I Malhotra - Full Document

Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma on 11 August, 2020

In view thereof, I answer the point No.1 for consideration that the suit property is undivided Hindu joint family property of Thulasi Sah and the plaintiffs and the defendants herein in view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma (cited supra), all his seven children being the coparceners became entitled for 1/8 th share each and the 1/8th share of Thulasi Sah devolved on 7 his seven children his wife and since, she died intestate, all the seven children get 1/7th share each in the suit property.
Supreme Court of India Cites 127 - Cited by 245 - A Mishra - Full Document

Vairavan Chettiar Represented By ... vs Srinivasachariar on 14 February, 1921

The learned Senior Counsel also relied upon the Full Bench Decision of this Court in Vairavan Chettiar, represented by Ramasami Chettiar Vs. Srinivasachariar 9, for the proposition that son acquires no legal rights over his father's self- 6 AIR 1979 Mad 1 7 (2018) 3 SCC 117 8 AIR 2002 MADRAS 402 9 XIII L.W. 475 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/27 A.S.No.429 of 2016 acquisitions and there can be no coparcenary between father and sons regarding self-acquired property.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

Surjit Lal Chhabda vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay on 6 October, 1975

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/27 A.S.No.429 of 2016 14.1. A joint Hindu family consists of persons lineally descended from a common ancestor and includes their wives and unmarried daughters. The daughter, on marriage, ceases to be a member of her father's family and becomes a member of husband's family. Thus, the joint Hindu family is thus a larger body consisting of a group of persons who are united by the tie of sapindaship arising by birth, marriage or adoption. (Paragraph No.13 of Surjit Lal Chhabda Vs. CIT10) 14.2. Coparcenary is a narrower body than the joint Hindu family. Before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, only male members of the family used to acquire an interest in the coparcenary property by birth. After the Amendment Act, 2005, even the daughters are also coparceners. A coparcener has no definite share in the coparcenary property, but, he has an undivided interest in it and the interest enlarges by deaths and diminishes by births in the family. It is not static.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 125 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document

Rohit Chauhan vs Surinder Singh & Ors on 15 July, 2013

(Paragraph No.11 of Rohit Chauhan Vs. Surinder Singh11) 14.3. The coparcenary property consists of ancestral property and the separate property of the coparceners thrown into common coparcenary stock. The term "ancestral property" is not defined in any Act. The 10 (1976) 3 SCC 142, 149 11 (2013) 9 SCC 419 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 12/27 A.S.No.429 of 2016 property inherited by a male Hindu from his father, father's father or father's father's father is an ancestral property. The essential feature of ancestral property, according to Mitakshara Law, is that the sons, grandsons, and great grandsons of the person who inherits it, acquire an interest and the rights attached to such property at the moment of their birth. The share which a coparcener obtains on partition of ancestral property is an ancestral property as regards his male issue. After partition, the property in the hands of the son will continue to be the ancestral property and the natural or adopted son of that son will take interest in it and is entitled to it by survivorship.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 110 - C K Prasad - Full Document
1   2 3 Next