Hindu Succession Act, 1956

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel in Property Dispute: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023)

/ Estoppel, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 with Section 8, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 8, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Transfer of Property Act, Transfer of Property Act with Section 6

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel in Property Dispute: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a release deed executed by a father relinquishing his rights in his father’s self-acquired property, for consideration, estops his sons from claiming a share in the same property after the grandfather’s death. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: Elumalai @ […]

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel in Property Dispute: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel on Inheritance Rights Based on Father’s Release Deed: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023)

/ Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 with Section 8, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 8, Hrishikesh Roy, Inheritance Law, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Transfer of Property Act, Transfer of Property Act with Section 6

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel on Inheritance Rights Based on Father’s Release Deed: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a release deed executed by a father relinquishing his inheritance rights, for consideration, estops his children from claiming those rights upon the grandfather’s death. CASE TYPE: Civil – Property Law, Inheritance Case Name: Elumalai @ Venkatesan

Supreme Court Upholds Estoppel on Inheritance Rights Based on Father’s Release Deed: Elumalai vs. Kamala (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022)

/ Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 2(2), Judges, Krishna Murari, Land Acquisition Act, Land Acquisition Act with Section 30, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a daughter from a Scheduled Tribe is entitled to a share of compensation for land acquired, based on survivorship under the Hindu Succession Act. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition/Civil Law Case Name: Kamla Neti (Dead) through

Supreme Court Denies Daughter’s Claim in Tribal Land Compensation: Kamla Neti vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Delhi Land Reforms Act Succession Rules: Har Naraini Devi vs. Union of India (20 September 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 31B, Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 with Section 50, Fundamental Rights, Hemant Gupta, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 4(2), Judges, Succession, Succession of Land, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Delhi Land Reforms Act Succession Rules: Har Naraini Devi vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Section 50(a) of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, which prioritizes male lineal descendants in matters of succession to agricultural land, is unconstitutional. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Land Reform, Succession. Case Name: Har Naraini Devi

Supreme Court Upholds Delhi Land Reforms Act Succession Rules: Har Naraini Devi vs. Union of India (20 September 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Intestate Succession in Faridkot Royal Family Dispute (2022)

/ Civil Law, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 5, Intestate Succession, Judges, Property Law, S. Ravindra Bhat, Succession Law, Sudhanshu Dhulia, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Intestate Succession in Faridkot Royal Family Dispute (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Rule of Primogeniture and validity of a will in matters of succession to private properties of a former ruler. CASE TYPE: Civil Succession Dispute Case Name: Maharani Deepinder Kaur (Since Deceased) Through Lrs. and Ors. vs. Rajkumari Amrit Kaur

Supreme Court Upholds Intestate Succession in Faridkot Royal Family Dispute (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Widow’s Right to Property Under Section 14(1) of Hindu Succession Act: Munni Devi vs. Rajendra (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 with Section 27, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 14(1), Judges, Maintenance Rights, Property Rights of Women

Supreme Court Upholds Widow’s Right to Property Under Section 14(1) of Hindu Succession Act: Munni Devi vs. Rajendra (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Hindu widow’s pre-existing right to maintenance, coupled with settled possession of property, ripens into full ownership under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Rights

Supreme Court Upholds Widow’s Right to Property Under Section 14(1) of Hindu Succession Act: Munni Devi vs. Rajendra (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Company Law Board Order in Family Dispute over Biological E. Ltd. (06 April 2022)

/ Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 398, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 399, Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 152(6), Companies Act, 2013 with Section 196, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 8, J.K. Maheshwari, Judges, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Company Law Board Order in Family Dispute over Biological E. Ltd. Date of the Judgment: 06 April 2022 Citation: Where available, provide the case citation in the Indian Supreme Court (INSC) format. Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran and Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.K. Maheshwari. This was a unanimous decision. Can a family

Supreme Court Upholds Company Law Board Order in Family Dispute over Biological E. Ltd. (06 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies partition of self-acquired property in family disputes: B.R. Patil vs. Tulsa Y. Sawkar (2022)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order I Rule 3, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order II Rule 3, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 8, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Non-Joinder of Parties, Partition of Property, Self-Acquired Property

Supreme Court clarifies partition of self-acquired property in family disputes: B.R. Patil vs. Tulsa Y. Sawkar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether self-acquired properties of a deceased person can be partitioned among legal heirs and whether a suit for partition can be dismissed for non-joinder of other family members and properties. CASE TYPE: Civil (Partition) Case Name:

Supreme Court clarifies partition of self-acquired property in family disputes: B.R. Patil vs. Tulsa Y. Sawkar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 97(1), Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 14, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Property Rights of a Female Hindu, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 41

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a limited estate granted to a Hindu female under a will becomes an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or remains a limited estate under Section 14(2). CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Property Law, Testamentary

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Settles Inheritance Rights of Daughters in Self-Acquired Property: Arunachala Gounder vs. Ponnusamy (20 January 2022)

/ Hindu Law, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 14, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 15, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 16, Judges, Krishna Murari, Mitakshara Law, S. Abdul Nazeer, Self-Acquired Property, Survivorship

Supreme Court Settles Inheritance Rights of Daughters in Self-Acquired Property: Arunachala Gounder vs. Ponnusamy (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Inheritance rights of daughters in the self-acquired property of their father under Hindu Law. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Property Law, Inheritance Law Case Name: Arunachala Gounder (Dead) By Lrs. vs. Ponnusamy and Ors. [Judgment Date]: 20 January 2022

Supreme Court Settles Inheritance Rights of Daughters in Self-Acquired Property: Arunachala Gounder vs. Ponnusamy (20 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles property rights under a will: Shri Shivaji Education Society vs. Omprakash (2021)

/ Appellate Procedure, Civil Procedure Code, Civil Procedure Code with Section 100, Hemant Gupta, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 14, Judges, Property Rights of Female Hindu, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Settles Property Rights Under a Will: Shri Shivaji Education Society vs. Omprakash (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of a will and the extent of property rights granted to a beneficiary. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Law Case Name: Shri Shivaji Education Society, Amravati Through Its President vs. Omprakash S/O Dinkar Deshmukh & Ors. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court settles property rights under a will: Shri Shivaji Education Society vs. Omprakash (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Stridhana Rights in Family Property Dispute: Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju vs. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju (2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, B.R. Gavai, Family Law, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Property Rights of Women, Stridhana, Terms of Reference

Supreme Court Clarifies Stridhana Rights in Family Property Dispute: Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju vs. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of Stridhana property rights in the context of a family partition dispute. CASE TYPE: Arbitration/Family Law Case Name: Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju & Anr. vs. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju & Ors. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Clarifies Stridhana Rights in Family Property Dispute: Pusapati Ashok Gajapathi Raju vs. Pusapati Madhuri Gajapathi Raju (2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top