Legal principles on partition suits involving minors and property shares after death clarified by Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts regarding the continuation of the suit for partition after the minor's death and the entitlement to a share in the property devised under the will. The judgment clarified the legal principles surrounding partition suits involving minors and the blending of separate property with joint family property, providing a comprehensive analysis of the issues involved in the case.

---

---

Issues:
1. Continuation of a suit for partition after the death of a minor.
2. Impression of joint family property character on property devised under a will.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1:
The case involved a suit for partition and separate possession of joint family property filed by a minor through his next friend, which was continued by the mother after the minor's death. The key issue was whether the suit was for the benefit of the minor, as partition of joint family property for a minor must be in their interest. The trial court and the High Court found that the partition would benefit the minor, supported by evidence that the adult coparceners' conduct was prejudicial to the minor's interest. The court clarified that the right claimed in such a suit is in property and devolves upon the legal representative of the minor upon their death, with the purpose of protecting the minor's interest. The court held that the suit did not abate upon the minor's death and could be continued by the legal representative if it was for the minor's benefit, emphasizing that the decree merely recognizes the right that existed at the suit's initiation.

Issue 2:
The second issue revolved around the property devised under a will and whether it had been impressed with the character of joint family property due to blending. The law states that separate property can become joint family property if voluntarily thrown into the common stock with the intention of abandoning separate claims. In this case, the court found no evidence of a conscious surrender of interest in the devised property by the family member, indicating no intention to blend it with joint family property. As a result, the court held that the mother was entitled to a fourth share in the property devised under the will. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision in favor of the mother.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts regarding the continuation of the suit for partition after the minor's death and the entitlement to a share in the property devised under the will. The judgment clarified the legal principles surrounding partition suits involving minors and the blending of separate property with joint family property, providing a comprehensive analysis of the issues involved in the case.

---