Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Joint Family Property

Joint Family Property Matrimonial Property Matters

Suit for Partition – The Court found that ‘C’ remarriage extinguished her rights to her first husband’s property, and she could not pass on any title to the plaintiff – The Court applied the Hindu Widow’s Remarriage Act, 1856, and relevant case law to determine the impact of Chiruthey’s remarriage on her property rights – The Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff could not inherit the property through ‘C’, as her rights were nullified upon remarriage, and the deeds did not confer valid title.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw

2024 INSC 287 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KIZHAKKE VATTAKANDIYIL MADHAVAN (DEAD) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. THIYYURKUNNATH MEETHAL JANAKI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose…

Joint Family Property Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1955 – Section 16 – Partition Suit – Entitlement of share to the children of void or voidable marriages – If a marriage is considered void or invalid, the children born from that marriage still have a legal right to inherit their parent’s property

Jan 21, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJA GOUNDER AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M. SENGODAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.M. Sundresh and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. ) Civil…

Adoption Joint Family Property

Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 – Section 16 – Adoption Deed – Mere fact that a deed of adoption has been registered cannot be taken as evidence of proof of adoption, as an adoption deed never proves an adoption – Factum of adoption has to be proved by oral evidence of giving or taking of the child and that the necessary ceremonies, where they are necessary to be performed, were carried out in accordance with shastras.

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOTURU NALINI KANTH — Appellant Vs. GAINEDI KALIPRASAD (DEAD, THROUGH LRS.) — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Joint Family Property Property Matters Will & Succession

A combined reading of Section 15(1)(a) and Section 16 of the Act would make it manifest that the property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve, firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband. Therefore, the plaintiff being the widow of the pre-deceased son does not have the first right or entitlement to receive any share in the share of her mother-inlaw.

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SACHIDHANANDAM SINCE DEAD THROUGH HIS LRS. — Appellant Vs. E. VANAJA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Hima Kohli and Prashant…

Joint Family Property Maintenance

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 142 – (CrPC) – S 125(3) – Maintenance to wife – Fails to comply with the order for payment of maintenance – Husband abandoned the wife, and virtually fled to Australia – Recovery of arrears of maintenance on the ground that she lives with her widowed mother, on whom she is dependent expenses. for including litigation expenses – This Court is not powerless, but can issue appropriate directions, and even decrees, for doing complete justice between the parties – In other words, the power under Article 142 is meant to supplement the existing legal framework – Directions issued for sale of joint/coparcenary property

Nov 1, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANMOHAN GOPAL — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, JJ. )…

Joint Family Property Will & Succession

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 6 – Devolution of interest in coparcenary property – In order to ascertain the shares of the heirs in the property of a deceased coparcener, the first step is to ascertain the share of the deceased himself in the coparcenary property and Explanation 1 to Section 6 provides a fictional expedient, namely, that his share is deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to him if a partition had taken place immediately before his death

Sep 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DERHA — Appellant Vs. VISHAL AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 4494 of…

Joint Family Property Matrimonial

Held, a child of a marriage which is null and void under Section 11 of HMA is statutorily conferred with legitimacy – Where a voidable marriage has been annulled by a decree of nullity under Section 12, of HMA a child ‘begotten or conceived’ before the decree has been made, is deemed to be their legitimate child notwithstanding the decree, if the child would have been legitimate to the parties to the marriage if a decree of dissolution had been passed instead of a decree of nullity

Sep 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH REVANASIDDAPPA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MALLIKARJUN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI., J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra,…

Joint Family Property

Hindu Succession Act 1956 – Essential ingredient of Section 14 subsection (1) is possession over the property – Possession being a prerequisite to sustain a claim under subsection (1) of Section 14 of the 1956 Act – Admittedly the plaintiff was never in possession of the property – Appeal dismissed.

Sep 3, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M. SIVADASAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. A. SOUDAMINI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar…

Joint Family Property

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 29A – Coparcenary rights – Partition and separate possession of one-third in the plaint schedule property – Property is not available partition as of the date of coming into force of Section 29A – There is no prohibition to effect a partition otherwise than through an instrument in writing by duly complying with the requirement of law – Division may also be effected under a settlement or oral understanding

Aug 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH H. VASANTHI — Appellant Vs. A. SANTHA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ.…

You missed

Constitution Election Laws

EVM and VVPAT – Reliability – The petitioners challenged the reliability of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) systems, suspecting potential manipulation and demanding transparency in the voting process – The core issues revolved around the integrity of EVMs, the adequacy of VVPAT verification, and the fundamental right of voters to know their votes are correctly recorded and counted – Petitioner argued for a return to paper ballots, provision of VVPAT slips to voters, or 100% counting of VVPAT slips alongside electronic counts, citing concerns over EVM transparency and voter confidence – The Election Commission of India (ECI) defended the EVMs’ success in ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections, highlighting technological safeguards against tampering and the benefits over paper ballots – The Court upheld the current EVM and VVPAT system, dismissing the petitions and suggesting improvements for transparency without disrupting the ongoing electoral process – The Court relied on past precedents, the ECI’s robust procedures, and the absence of cogent material evidence against EVMs to reject the petitions – The judgment referenced constitutional provisions, electoral laws, and previous rulings to support the ECI’s position and the current electoral practices – The Supreme Court concluded that the EVMs and VVPAT systems are reliable, and the petitions were dismissed based on the lack of substantial evidence against the current electoral process.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302, 304 and 34 – Acquittal – Benefit of Doubt – The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, citing unreliable witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence – The Court’s reasoning focused on the credibility of the key witnesses and the absence of corroborative material to support the prosecution’s case – The legal reasoning included the principle of ‘falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus’ not being applicable in Indian jurisprudence – The conclusion was that the appellant deserved acquittal due to the benefit of doubt – The judicial opinion emphasized the quality of evidence over quantity in determining the truth.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
I P C

National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 22(3) – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 121A, 122, 123, 124A and 120B – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 16, 18, 18B, 20, 38, 39 and 43D – The case involves the State of West Bengal appealing against a High Court judgment that quashed UAPA proceedings against the respondent due to jurisdiction issues – The Court reasoned that the Sessions Court had jurisdiction as per Section 22(3) of the NIA Act since the State had not constituted a Special Court – The Court discussed the modified application of Section 167 CrPC under Section 43D of UAPA and the definition of ‘Court’ under Section 2(1)(d) of UAPA. – The Supreme Court concluded that the City Sessions Court had the jurisdiction to pass the order adding UAPA offences and permitted the continuation of the trial.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Tenders & Contracts

The Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench’s order, restored the Single Judge’s order, and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the principles of delay and latches in judicial proceedings – The Court reasoned that the writ petitioner’s delay in asserting rights and acquiescence to the Corporation’s actions warranted dismissal of the writ petition – The Court cited precedents stating that delay defeats equity and that the High Court may refuse to exercise its extraordinary powers if there is negligence or omission on the part of the applicant – The appeal was allowed, and the writ petition was dismissed on the grounds of delay and latches, with no order as to costs.

Apr 27, 2024 sclaw