S.M. JAKATI & ANOTHER versus S.M. BORKAR & OTHERS

S.M. JAKATI & ANOTHER versus S.M. BORKAR & OTHERS

The liability incurred by the father as managing director due to negligence, was not avyavaharika; the sons’ pious obligation to discharge the debt exists even after partition. The auction sale under s.155 of Bombay Land Revenue Code validly included the entire property, including sons' shares, because what was offered, sold and bought was the whole bungalow, not merely the father's share. Severance of status by partition did not, on these facts, prevent the auction sale of the sons' interest.

Parties
Appellant: S. M. Jakati & Another; Respondent: S. M. Borkar & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 September 1958
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Pious Obligation of Son, Avyavaharika Debt, Partition, Auction Sale of Joint Family Property, Bombay Land Revenue Code S.155
Hindu Law Property Law Pious Obligation of Son Avyavaharika Debt Partition Auction Sale of Joint Family Property Bombay Land Revenue Code S.155

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. M. Jakati & Another

Appellant

S. M. Borkar & Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the liability incurred by the father was avyavaharika and not binding on sons
  2. 2 Whether institution of suit for partition severs status and prevents auction sale of sons' shares
  3. 3 Whether auction sale under s.155 of Bombay Land Revenue Code passes only father’s share or entire coparcenary property

Ratio Decidendi

The liability incurred by the father as managing director due to negligence, was not avyavaharika; the sons’ pious obligation to discharge the debt exists even after partition. The auction sale under s.155 of Bombay Land Revenue Code validly included the entire property, including sons' shares, because what was offered, sold and bought was the whole bungalow, not merely the father's share. Severance of status by partition did not, on these facts, prevent the auction sale of the sons' interest.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal is dismissed
  • Plaintiffs have no interest left in the disputed property that was sold at auction