Skip to content


Kailash Pati Devi Vs. Bhubneshwari Devi and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 2798 of 1980
Judge
Reported inAIR1984SC1802; (1985)1SCC405; 1984(16)LC833(SC)
AppellantKailash Pati Devi
RespondentBhubneshwari Devi and ors.
Appellant Advocate Yogeshwar Prasad, Sr. Adv. and; Rani Chhabra, Adv
Respondent Advocate Pramod Swarup, Adv.
Prior historyFrom the Judgment and Order dated April 4, 1980 of the Allahabad High Court in S.A. No. 2194 of 1977--
Excerpt:
.....disputes act are alleged, the civil courts jurisdiction may be held to be barred but if the suit is based on the violation of principles of common law or constitutional provisions or on other grounds, the civil courts jurisdiction may not be held to be barred. if no right is claimed under a special statute in terms whereof the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred, the civil court will have jurisdiction. moreover, where the conditions of service are governed by two statutes, the effect thereof on an order passed against an employee/workman in violation of a rule which would attract both the statutes. an attempt shall be made in a case of that nature to apply the principles of harmonious construction. when there is a doubt as to whether civil court has jurisdiction to try a.....y.v. chandrachud, c.j.1. the purchaser of joint family property from a member of a joint hindu family may have the right to file a general suit for partition against the members of the joint family and, indeed, that may be the proper remedy for him to adopt to effectuate his purchase. but, that question is of academic importance here since it appears that the property involved in this suit, which was purchased by the appellant from one of the members of the joint hindu family, is the only joint family property available for being partitioned. there are, therefore, no equities to be adjusted as between the parties. accordingly, we agree with the concurrent findings recorded by the trial court, the district court and the high court and dismiss this appeal. there will be no order as to.....
Judgment:

Y.V. Chandrachud, C.J.

1. The purchaser of joint family property from a member of a joint Hindu family may have the right to file a general suit for partition against the members of the joint family and, indeed, that may be the proper remedy for him to adopt to effectuate his purchase. But, that question is of academic importance here since it appears that the property involved in this suit, which was purchased by the appellant from one of the members of the joint Hindu family, is the only joint family property available for being partitioned. There are, therefore, no equities to be adjusted as between the parties. Accordingly, we agree with the concurrent findings recorded by the trial court, the District Court and the High Court and dismiss this appeal. There will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //