Deprecated: Optional parameter $name declared before required parameter $keys is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/plugins/layerslider/assets/classes/class.ls.config.php on line 74

Deprecated: Optional parameter $port_size declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 208

Deprecated: Optional parameter $show_title declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 208

Deprecated: Optional parameter $show_tag declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 208

Deprecated: Optional parameter $port_size declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 271

Deprecated: Optional parameter $show_title declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 271

Deprecated: Optional parameter $show_tag declared before required parameter $parent_category is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/portfolio-item.php on line 271

Deprecated: Optional parameter $ignore declared before required parameter $dest_h is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/themes/bluediamond/include/plugin/filosofo-image/filosofo-custom-image-sizes.php on line 241

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-content/plugins/layerslider/assets/classes/class.ls.config.php:74) in /home/lawfindbl/public_html/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Joint Hindu Family, Ancestral and Coparcenery Property https://lawfinderblog.com/joint-hindu-family-ancestral-and-coparcenery-property/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=joint-hindu-family-ancestral-and-coparcenery-property Legal Articles and True Opinions Sat, 15 Aug 2020 07:55:56 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.4 By: Adv. Liladhar Agarwal https://lawfinderblog.com/joint-hindu-family-ancestral-and-coparcenery-property/#comment-33 Sat, 15 Aug 2020 07:55:56 +0000 https://lawfinderblog.com/?p=3633#comment-33 I appreciate your efforts to discuss and explain Hindu Law and Hindu Succession Act 1956 but I found that in this article you have not discussed the effect of the following new cases of Supreme Court relating PARTITION of HUF after the commencement of Hindu Succession Act:-
(1) Uttam vs Saubhag Singh &ors.
AIR 2016 (S.C.) 1169 (Law Finder Doc Id #747079)

(2) Radha Bai vs Ram Narayan & ors.
2020 (1) R.C.R. (Civil) 326 (Law Finder Doc Id #1624892)

(3) M. Arumugam vs Ammanuammal &ors.
2020 D.N.J. 80 (Law Finder Doc Id #1662019)

If we go through the above cases then the legal position about partition of HUF after 1956 emerges as under :-

On a conjoint reading of Section 4,8 and 19 of the Act, after joint family property has been distributed in accordance with section 8 on principles of intestacy, the joint family property ceases to be joint family property in the hands of the various person who have succeeded to it as they hold the property as tenants in common and not as joint tenants.
The matter of partition has also been discussed in the latest larger bench judgment of Supreme Court ( Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma) dated 11-08-2020 which also clarifies that if partition of HUF has taken place as per law the co-parcenery ceases and the daughter will not get any share in HUF property because of partition.
If we go through the above judgments it becomes clear that if there is a partition of HUF after the commencement of Hindu Succession Act 1956 then the property in the hands of co-parcener will becomes his property as per the section-8 of Hindu Succession Act 1956 and In such case there cannot be revival of HUF again even on the birth of son after partition.
My opinion about partition of HUF after Act of 1956 is that the property in the hands of co-parcener being his individual property cannot be converted again in HUF property and if such property is not alienated by him in his lifetime then the said property will passes as per the section- 8 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 to the Heir`s mentioned in the schedule of the Act.
According to me, the legal position about the partition of HUF after the Act of 1956 should be explained in your blog clearly as there is a different opinion on this subject.
I`l be thankful to you If you clarify the position of partition of HUF property after the Act of 1956.
If u like to discuss on this subject, I welcome you to write or contact me.

Liladhar Agarwal
Senior Advocate
Rajasthan High Court

]]> By: N Subramaniyan https://lawfinderblog.com/joint-hindu-family-ancestral-and-coparcenery-property/#comment-32 Sat, 08 Aug 2020 14:54:47 +0000 https://lawfinderblog.com/?p=3633#comment-32 Very nice one giving complete details on respect of ancestral properties.

]]>