immaterial because plaintiff claims
right in the suit properties as a coparcener of a joint Hindu family/HUF. On
behalf of the plaintiff, reliance ... late Sh. Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a coparcener in the
aforesaid suit properties on the ground that the properties when
Mitakshara School of Law of Joint Hindu Families, when a coparcener of a Hindu
Undivided Family seeks partition, then on the communication of the intention ... effect a
partition, of the joint family properties, the shares of the coparceners in the joint family
properties are crystallized/frozen at a particular percentage
immaterial because plaintiff claims right in the suit
properties as a coparcener of a joint Hindu family/HUF. On behalf of
the plaintiff, reliance ... late Sh. Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a
coparcener in the aforesaid suit properties on the ground that the
properties when
late Sh. Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a coparcener
in the aforesaid suit properties on the ground that the properties when ... continued
thereby entitling the plaintiff his rights in the same as a coparcener.
5. The Supreme Court around 30 years back in the judgment
provides that now daughters will
have an equal share as a male coparcener in the HUF
properties. Therefore in my opinion once we accept ... karta, the plaintiff and defendant nos. 2 to 4 (sons)
were male coparceners and defendant nos. 5 and 6
(daughters of Sh. Lakhpat
late Sh. Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a
coparcener in the aforesaid suit properties on the ground that the
properties when ... continued thereby entitling the plaintiff his rights in
the same as a coparcener.
5. The Supreme Court around 30 years back in the judgment
where the person in whose name the property is held is a
coparcener in a Hindu undivided family and the property is held ... benefit of the coparceners in the family.
(b) where the person in whose name the property is held is a trustee or
other person standing
Whether suit property is joint property owned by all the coparcener, if
so, its effect? (OPD)
5. Relief."
4. Both the parties led evidence ... late Sh.
Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a coparcener in the aforesaid suit
properties on the ground that the properties when
only to purchase properties which has been in
joint names of all coparceners with exception of name of Defendant No.3.
This addition was made ... Karta and
the plaintiff and the defendant No.1 are the three coparceners having 1/3rd
share each as the defendant
late Sh.
Jage Ram, plaintiff is entitled to his share as a coparcener in the aforesaid suit
properties on the ground that the properties when ... continued thereby entitling the plaintiff his
rights in the same as a coparcener.
5. The Supreme Court around 30 years back in the judgment
