Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 6001 (1.94 seconds)

Prakash vs Phulavati . on 16 October, 2015

Amendment Act 39 of 2005 and was entitled to inherit the coparcenary property equal to her brothers, apart from contentions based on individual claims ... joint family property by birth. They are also sharer members of the coparcenary property at par with all male members. When a partition takes place
Supreme Court of India Cites 59 - Cited by 270 - A K Goel - Full Document

Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma on 11 August, 2020

given retrospective effect, when the daughters were denied right in the coparcenary property, pending proceedings are to be decided in the light of the amended ... coparcener. Any coparcener, including a daughter, can claim a partition in the coparcenary property. Gurunalingappa died in the 5 year 2001, leaving behind two daughters
Supreme Court of India Cites 127 - Cited by 245 - A Mishra - Full Document

Uttam vs Saubhag Singh & Ors on 2 March, 2016

that therefore the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property would devolve by intestate succession under Section 8 of the said Act. However ... argued that it is only the interest of the deceased in such coparcenary property that would devolve by intestate succession, leaving the joint family property
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 144 - R F Nariman - Full Document

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

although separate property qua other relations but it attained the characteristics of coparcenary property after the plaintiff Rohit Chauhan was born. The finding recorded ... property immediately when Rohit Chauhan was born thereby getting characteristic of coparcenary property.” Accordingly, the trial court decreed the suit. Defendant no. 1, aggrieved
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 110 - C K Prasad - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next