Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Appeals Dismissed: Joint Family Properties Partible, Impartibility Rule Extinct</h1> <h3>Nagesh Bisto Desai and Ors. Versus Khando Tirmal Desai and Ors.</h3> The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Court's judgment that the suit properties were joint family properties and thus partible. The incidents of ... - Issues Involved:1. Impartibility of the Kundgol Deshgat Estate.2. Applicability of the rule of lineal primogeniture.3. Impact of the Bombay Paragana and Kulkarni Watans Abolition Act, 1950 (Act No. 60 of 1950) and the Bombay Merged Territories Miscellaneous Alienations Abolition Act, 1955 (Act No. 22 of 1955) on the watan properties.4. Rights of the plaintiff and other family members in the watan properties.5. Partition and regrant of watan lands.Detailed Analysis:1. Impartibility of the Kundgol Deshgat Estate:The plaintiff claimed that the Kundgol Deshgat Estate was impartible by custom and succession to it was governed by the rule of lineal primogeniture. The trial court and the High Court rejected this claim, holding that the properties were joint family properties and thus partible. The courts found that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the custom of impartibility. The judgment cited the Privy Council's ruling in Martand Rao v. Malhar Rao, which emphasized that the burden of proving a special custom of impartibility lies on the party asserting it.2. Applicability of the Rule of Lineal Primogeniture:The plaintiff argued that even if the estate was impartible, the rule of lineal primogeniture governed succession. The courts below found no merit in this argument, noting that the rule of lineal primogeniture, like the custom of impartibility, required clear and unambiguous evidence, which the plaintiff failed to provide. The judgment referenced the Privy Council's decision in Adrishappa v. Gurshindappa, which held that the burden of proving the existence of a custom different from the ordinary law of inheritance lies on the party alleging it.3. Impact of Act No. 60 of 1950 and Act No. 22 of 1955:The principal question was whether these Acts extinguished the incidents of impartibility and the rule of lineal primogeniture. The judgment concluded that the Acts brought about a change in the tenure or character of holding as watan land but did not affect other legal incidents of the property under personal law. The Acts provided for the abolition of watans, resumption of watan land, and its regrant to the holder as an occupant, thereby extinguishing the incidents of impartibility and special succession rules.4. Rights of the Plaintiff and Other Family Members:The plaintiff's claim for exclusive possession and enjoyment of the suit properties was rejected. The courts held that the properties were joint family properties and thus partible. The judgment emphasized that the grant of watan to the eldest family member did not make the watan properties the exclusive property of the watandar. The Watan Act and subsequent legislation were designed to preserve the pre-existing rights of the members of the joint Hindu family.5. Partition and Regrant of Watan Lands:The courts found that the regrant of watan lands under the Acts must enure to the benefit of the entire joint Hindu family. The judgment noted that the regrant of land to the watandar under the Acts did not make the land the exclusive property of the watandar but rather maintained its character as joint family property. The provisions of the Acts imposed restrictions on alienation and partition but did not create a statutory bar to partition once the conditions mentioned therein were fulfilled.Conclusion:The appeals were dismissed, affirming the High Court's judgment that the suit properties were joint family properties and thus partible. The incidents of impartibility and the rule of lineal primogeniture were extinguished by Act No. 60 of 1950 and Act No. 22 of 1955. The regrant of watan lands under these Acts enured to the benefit of the entire joint Hindu family, subject to restrictions on alienation and partition.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found