SUSHIL KUMAR & ANR. versus RAM PRAKASH & ORS.
A coparcener cannot maintain a suit for permanent injunction restraining the Karta from alienating joint Hindu family property because the coparcener has an equally efficacious remedy to challenge the alienation after it occurs. Sections 38 and 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act bar such injunctions.
- Parties
- Appellants: Sushil Kumar & Anr.; Respondents: Ram Prakash & Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 13 January 1988
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in R.s.a. No. 3521 of 1986
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Coparcenary Rights, Permanent Injunction, Alienation of Joint Hindu Family Property, Specific Relief Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sushil Kumar & Anr.
Appellants
Ram Prakash & Ors.
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in R.s.a. No. 3521 of 1986
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a coparcener can maintain a suit for permanent injunction under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act restraining the Karta of a Joint Hindu Family from alienating or selling joint Hindu coparcenary property.
Ratio Decidendi
A coparcener cannot maintain a suit for permanent injunction restraining the Karta from alienating joint Hindu family property because the coparcener has an equally efficacious remedy to challenge the alienation after it occurs. Sections 38 and 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act bar such injunctions.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Judgment and decree of the High Court affirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment