NDLI: Chinnathayi Alias Veeralakshmi Vs. Kulasekara Pandiya Naicker and Another

Chinnathayi Alias Veeralakshmi Vs. Kulasekara Pandiya Naicker and Another

Content Provider: Supreme Court of India

Please Log-in to view this content

If you are not a registered user, please register first and then use the e-mail id and password to log-in.

Advisory jurisdiction

Arbitration petition

Shrimant Sardar Bhujangaro Daulatrao Ghorpade Vs. Shrimant Malojirao Daulatrao Ghorpade and Others

N. P. Ponnuswami Vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and Others

The State of West Bengal Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar

Ruby General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pearey Lal Kumar and Another.

Dhiyan Singh and Another Vs. Jugal Kishore and Another

Kashinath Bhaskar Datar Vs. Bhaskar Vishweshwar Karve

State of Madras Vs. V.g. Row

Veerappa Pillai Vs. Raman & Raman Ltd. and Others

Mahant Pragdasji Guuru Bhagwandasji Vs. Patel Ishwarlalbhai Narsibhai and Others

Pannalal and Another Vs. Mst. Naraini and Others

Joshi Girjadharji and Another Vs. Lachmanji Panth and Others

Musammat Phool Kuer Vs. Musammat Pem Kuer and Another

Mahabir Gope and Others Vs. Harbans Narain Singh and Others

Parry & Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Employees' Association, Madras.

Raja Bhupendra Narain Singha Bahadur Vs. Maharaj Bahadur Singh and Others

Shamarao V. Parulekar Vs. The District Magistrate, Thana, Bombay and Two Others

Ebrahim Aboobakar and Another Vs. Custodian General of Evacuee Property

The State of Bihar Vs. Shailabala Devi

The State of Bombay Vs. Purushottam Jog Naik

The Union of India Vs. Hira Devi and Another

Thakur Gokalchand Vs. Parvin Kumari

Gur Narain Das and Another Vs. Gur Tahal Das and Others

Nar Hari Sastri and Others Vs. Shri Badrinath Temple Committee

Raja Suriya Pal Singh Vs. The State of U.p. and Another

The State of Bihar Vs. Maharajadhiraja Sir Kameshwar Singh of Darbhanga and Others

Mohd. Amin and Others Vs. Vakil Ahmed and Others

Shrimati Hira Devi and Others Vs. District Board, Shahjahanpur

State of Travancore-cochin and Others Vs. The Bombay Co. Ltd.

Commissioner of Excess Profit Tax Bombay City Vs. Sri Lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd.

Thakur Rudreswari Prasad Sinha Vs. Srimati Rani Probhabhati and Others

The State of Orissa Vs. Madan Gopal Rungta

Sant Lal Mahton Vs. Kamala Prasad.

Collector of Bombay Vs. Municipal Corporation of The City of Bombay and Others .

Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. Finlay Mills Ltd.

Tikait Hargobind Prasad Singh Vs. Srimatya Phaldani Kumari

Ram Kumar Das Vs. Jagadish Chandra Deb Dhabal Deb and Another

Commissioner of Police, Bombay Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji

Ganga Saran Vs. Ram Charan Ram Gopal

Kidar Lall Seal and Another Vs. Hari Lall Seal

Annagouda Nathgouda Patil Vs. Court of Wards and Another

Chinnathayi Alias Veeralakshmi Vs. Kulasekara Pandiya Naicker and Another

Civil miscellaneous petition

Contempt petition civil

Contempt petition criminal

Criminal appeal

Criminal miscellaneous petition

Curative petition Criminal

Curative petition civil

Death reference case

Disciplinary jurisdiction

Election petition civil

Habeas corpus petition

Miscellaneous application

Review petition civil

Review petition criminal

Special leave petition civil

Special leave petition criminal

Special reference case

Suo moto contempt petition civil

Suo moto contempt petition criminal

Suo moto transfer petition civil

Suo moto transfer petition criminal

Suo moto writ petition civil

Suo moto writ petition criminal

Tax reference case

Transfer petition civil

Transfer petition criminal

Transferred case civil

Transferred case criminal

Writ petition civil

Writ petition criminal

Chinnathayi Alias Veeralakshmi Vs. Kulasekara Pandiya Naicker and Another

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	lmpartible estate-Succession-Extinction of branch
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	Impartial estate—Succession—Extinction of branch—-Disputes as to succession—Compromise—Construction of deed—Disruption of family—Renunciation of right to succession by junior members of other branches—Sufficiency of evidence—Right to effect partition— Effect of general words of release. To establish that an impartial estate has ceased to be joint family property for purposes of succession it is necessary to prove an intention, express or implied, on the part of the junior members of the family to give up their chance of succeeding to the estate. In each case it is incumbent on the plaintiff to adduce satisfactory grounds for holding that the joint ownership of the defendant’s branch in the estate was determined so that it became the separate property of the last holder’s branch. The test to be applied is whether the facts show a clear intention to renounce or surrender any interest in the impartial estate or a_ relin- relinquishment of the right of succession and an intention to impress upon the zamindari the character of separate property.The right to bring about a partition of an impartial estate cannot be inferred from the power of alienation that the holder thereof may possess. In the case of an impartial estate the power to divide it amongst the members does not exist, though the power in the holder to alienate it is there, and from the existence of the one power the other cannot be deduced, as it is destructive of the very nature and character of the estate and makes it partible property.A member of a joint family owning an impartible estate can on behalf of himself and his heirs renounce his right of succession but any such relinquishment must operate for the benefit of all the members and the surrender must be in favour of all the branches of the family as representing all its members. General words of release in a release deed do not mean release of rights other than those then put up, and have to be limited to the circumstances which were in the contemplation of the parties when it was executed. On the death of the holder of an impartible estate who represented the first branch his widow K got into possession claiming that the estate was the separate property of her husband and also under a will. Disputes arose between her and the members of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th branches of the family and these were settled amicably. S who was the senior member of the 3rd branch obtained village D and one-fourth of certain pannai lands as absolute owner and executed a release deed on 6th May, 1890, in these terms: “Whatever rights over the said zamin proper- ties and in all other above mentioned properties S might possess he gives up such rights absolutely in favour of the said K and her heirs enabling them to enjoy them with the power of aliena have no claim at all to the properties shown as belonging to K.” KS who represented the 2nd branch and had instituted a suit tion thereof by gift, sale etc......... The said S and his heirs shall against. K compromised the suit on the 10th May, 1890, under a deed which provided inter alia: (i) that the zamindari shall be enjoyed by K till her lifetime and that KS and his heirs shall after the lifetime of K enjoy the zamindari except village D which was given to S; (ii) village B and one-fourth of certain pannai lands shail be given to KS absolutely ; (iii) all other pannai lands, build- ings and movables which belonged to K’s husband shall be enjoyed by K and her heirs absolutely.” On the death of K the estate became vested in Z, the son of KS. The death of Z without issue the second branch became extinct and disputes arose with regard to the ownership of the pannai lands and buildings, village B, and the zamindari between the widow of Z (who was the grand-daughter of K) and the senior members of the 3rd and 4th branches:Held: (i) that as KS was competent to alienate the pannai lands and buildings in favour of K and vest her with absolute title, and S had also agreed to give them to her absolutely, K became the absolute owner of these lands and buildings and these ceased to be part of the joint estate and devolved on the grand-daughters of K as her stridhana heirs.(ii) In view of the arrangement of 1890 it was not open to any of the parties to deny that the village B was separated from the zamindari and given to KS absolutely as his private property, The village consequently devolved on Z as separate property and on his death it devolved on his widow.(iii) The arrangement made in 1890 did not evidence a partition amongst the’ members of the joint family or prove an intention on the part of the junior members of the family to renounce their expectancy of succession by survivor-ship on failure of the male lineal descendants in the branch of KS. (iv) That the recitals in the release deed executed by S had to be read in the light of the compromise in the suit of KS. and the proper proper inference from both the documents read together was that S renounced only his right to succeed to the zamindari immediately as the senior most member of the family and that he. did not renounce his right or the right of his branch to succeed to the zamindari by survivor-ship if and when occasion arose ; the senior member of the 3rd branch was therefore entitled to succeed to the zamindari in preference to the senior member of the 4th branch and the widow of Z.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan
Neutral Citation	1951 INSC 57
Petitioner	Chinnathayi Alias Veeralakshmi
Respondent	Kulasekara Pandiya Naicker And Another
SCR	[1952] 1 S.C.R. 241
Judgement Date	1951-12-14
Case Number	29

Central Library (ISO-9001:2015 Certified)
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Kharagpur, West Bengal, India | PIN - 721302

See location in the Map
03222 282435
Mail: support@ndl.gov.in

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in