UTTAM versus SAUBHAG SINGH & ORS.

UTTAM versus SAUBHAG SINGH & ORS.

On the death of the plaintiff's grandfather in 1973, since the grandfather left behind a widow (a Class I female heir), the ancestral property devolved by succession under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. The property ceased to be joint family property and became held by the heirs as tenants in common. Since the plaintiff was born in 1977, after the property so devolved, he could not claim a coparcenary right by birth and the suit for partition was not maintainable.

Parties
Appellant: Uttam; Respondents: Saubhag Singh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court (second Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Hindu Succession Act Section 6 and Section 8, Partition Suits, Ancestral Property, Mitakshara Coparcenary, Devolution by Intestacy Vs. Survivorship
Hindu Law Succession Law Property Law Hindu Succession Act Section 6 and Section 8 Partition Suits Ancestral Property Mitakshara Coparcenary Devolution by Intestacy Vs. Survivorship

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uttam

Appellant

Saubhag Singh & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amendment to Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 2005 applies to partition suit filed in 1998 and decided in 2000
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff/grandson born after opening of succession in 1973 has right to partition joint family property as coparcener
  3. 3 Effect of Sections 4, 6, 8, and 19 of Hindu Succession Act on devolution of property after death of male coparcener leaving Class I female heirs

Ratio Decidendi

On the death of the plaintiff's grandfather in 1973, since the grandfather left behind a widow (a Class I female heir), the ancestral property devolved by succession under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. The property ceased to be joint family property and became held by the heirs as tenants in common. Since the plaintiff was born in 1977, after the property so devolved, he could not claim a coparcenary right by birth and the suit for partition was not maintainable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Suit for partition by appellant/plaintiff is not maintainable on facts and law; no costs ordered.