VidhiSangh

Supreme Court of India · 01/07/2019

ARSHNOOR SINGH versus HARPAL KAUR & ORS.

[2019] 8 S.C.R. 999 · 2019 INSC 708

AI-generated headnote. Verify against the judgment before relying on it. Paragraph numbers refer to the judgment.

Summary

Property inherited under Mitakshara law when succession opened in 1951 retained its coparcenary character as against male descendants despite a later partition. The appellant therefore acquired an interest by birth and could challenge his father’s alienation. The purchaser failed to establish legal necessity or benefit to the estate, and both parties admitted absence of consideration. The original sale deeds and the subsequent pendente lite sale were cancelled.

Issues

  1. Whether the pre-1956 inheritance and later partition left the property coparcenary as against the appellant.
  2. Whether the challenged sales were justified by legal necessity or benefit to the estate.
  3. Whether the appellant had standing and the subsequent purchaser acquired title.

Held

Result

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside. Both sale deeds dated 1 September 1999 and the subsequent deed dated 30 October 2007 cancelled and set aside. Appellant’s name directed to be recorded as owner in the Jamabandis. Pending applications disposed of.

Judgment PDF: Supreme Court of India, [2019] 8 S.C.R. 999.