Jothinathan v. Angammal
Case brief
What is this about?
This second appeal challenged the share distribution in ancestral property succession. The Court modified the lower courts' judgment, correcting the share allocation based on family branches: appellants to 4/9th, respondents 2-6 to 4/9th, and the plaintiff to 1/9th.
What did the court decide?
Preliminary decree modified awarding plaintiff 1/9 share, appellants 4/9 share, and respondents 2-6 4/9 share.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 03.10.2018
PRONOUNCED ON : 22 .10.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
S. A.No.346 of 2015 and MP No.1 of 2015
- Jothinathan
2. Rajammal ..Appellants/Appellants/Defendants 1 & 2
Vs.
1. Angammal .. First Respondent/Respondent/Plaintiff
2. Kannammal
3. Mani
4. Pushpa
5. Mallika
6. Jamuna
7. Lakshmiyammal ..Respondents 2 to 7/Appellants 4 to 9/
Defendants 4 to 8
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, against the judgment and decree dated 15.04.2013 passed in A.S.No.2 of 2012 on the file of the Sub Court, Perundurai, confirming the judgment and decree dated 19.01.2011 in O.S.No.247 of 2008 passed on the file of the District Munsif Court-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran For R1 : Mr.K.S.Jayaganeshan For R2 to R6 : Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar For R7 : No apperance Set exparte Vide order dated 03.10.2018
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the courts below were right in holding the plaintiff entitled to a share in ancestral property when the father died before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Whether the courts below were correct in holding all parties entitled to 1/9th share without considering the family tree for determining 4/9th and 4/9th shares respectively.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Jothinathan
- applicant
Rajammal
- respondent
Angammal
- respondent
Kannammal
- respondent
Mani
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court