Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the properties standing in the appellant's name were joint family properties or whether, in the absence of proof of any contrary source of title, the appellant became full owner thereof under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act.
Analysis: The properties at items 1 and 2 stood in the appellant's name. The record did not establish any independent basis to displace her title or to show that the properties belonged to the joint family. Section 14(1) confers full ownership on a female Hindu in respect of property possessed by her, and the provision has overriding effect over earlier notions of limited ownership. On the facts found, the properties could not be treated as joint family properties.
Conclusion: The appellant was held to be the full owner of the properties standing in her name, and the contrary finding of joint family ownership was set aside.