TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant's Claim for Ancestral Property Dismissed by Supreme Court; HUF Status Not Proven</h1> The appellant's claim for partition and possession of ancestral property as HUF property was dismissed by the Supreme Court. The court held that the ... - Issues involved: Claim of hereditary rights, partition of properties, interpretation of Hindu Succession Act, 1956.Summary:The appellant sought partition and possession of properties based on hereditary rights, claiming ancestral property as HUF property. The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff failed to establish the property as part of an HUF, following legal precedents that inheritance from paternal ancestors is self-acquired property. The appellant challenged the dismissal, arguing entitlement as a coparcener member of an HUF.The Supreme Court precedent in Chander Sen and Yudhister clarified that a son's right in ancestral property accrues at birth, not inheritance, affected by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The appellant's claim lacked evidence of the property being HUF, leading to dismissal of the suit by the Single Judge. The appellant's reliance on Thamma Venkata Subbamma case was deemed misplaced.The appellant failed to prove the property as HUF, as required by law, and did not establish devolution of HUF interest from the grandfather. The appellant's argument neglected the property's self-acquired status under the law, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The court upheld the Single Judge's decision, dismissing the appeal and related applications.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
