2023 (9) TMI 1735

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. The captioned appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.05.2018 in R.F.A No. 301 of 2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. 3. In view of the conflict between two, Two Judge Bench decisions of this Court vis. Prakash v. Phulavati [(2016) 2 SCC 36] and Danamma @ Suman Surpur v. Amar [(2018) 3 SCC 343], the question was referred to a larger Bench and the reference was answered vide the decision in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma & Ors.[(2020) 9 SCC 1]. The operative part of the said decision reads thus:- "137. Resultantly, we answer the reference as under: 137.1 The provisions contained in substituted Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 confer status of coparcener on the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....908 or effected by a decree of a court. However, in exceptional cases where plea of oral partition is supported by public documents and partition is finally evinced in the same manner as if it had been affected (sic effected) by a decree of a court, it may be accepted. A plea of partition based on oral evidence alone cannot be accepted and to be rejected outrightly. 138. We understand that on this question, suits/appeals are pending before different High Courts and subordinate courts. The matters have already been delayed due to legal imbroglio caused by conflicting decisions. The daughters cannot be deprived of their right of equality conferred upon them by Section 6. Hence, we request that the pending matters be decided, as far a....