Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1958P& H44
..... 14.as a matter of fact, in so far as the question of the right of pre-emption is concerned, even in the hindu succession act 1956, section 22 provides for preferential right to acquire property in certain cases so that the very act upon which the learned counsel places reliance gives recognition to a statutory right of pre-emption and the right of pre-emption in ..... of article 14 of the constitution because-the right of pre-emption under the act in regard-to urban immoveable property still continues to exist. the hindu succession act, 1956, relates to a subject matter which is obviously quite ..... regard to urban immoveable property under the act is also a statutory right of pre-emption though it is based on the proof of custom as to the existence of the right.this argument based on section 4 of the-hindu succession act, 1956, does not in the least show that there is any contravention of the provisions ..... pre-emption in regard to urban immoveable! property is a right, according to section 7 of the act, based on custom. the learned counsel for the petitioner refers to section 4 of the hindu succession act (act no. xxx of 1956) and points out that by that section custom, in so far as it concerns hindu law, has mostly been abolished and to maintain a right of pre-emption according .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2005Kant160; ILR2005KAR358; 2005(2)KarLJ262
..... filed a suit for declaration that the sale deeds executed by the first defendant in favour of the defendants no. 2 to 4 is void and in contravention section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956. further pray for determination of the value of the suit properties and thereafter to direct the defendants to execute the sale deed in respect of the suit property ..... was decreed. the first defendant sold the properties allotted to her share to the defendants no. 2 to 4.3. the plaintiff herein made an application under section 22 of the hindu succession act claiming right of preemption to purchase the properties allotted to the share of the first defendant. the trial court in the final decree proceedings declared that the plaintiff has ..... after the death of her husband sells the property. therefore, in between the plaintiff and first defendant the question of right of preemption would not arise and provisions of section 22 of the hindu succession act do not apply. in that view, the claims of right of preemption is untenable. the finding of the trial court is sound and proper. accordingly, the appeal ..... preemption claimed by the plaintiff is kept open for adjudication in the present suit.4. the provisions of section 22 of the hindu succession act are extracted hereunder for convenient reference.'22. preferential right to acquire property in certain cases -(1) where, after the commencement of this act, an interest in any immovable property of an intestate, or in any business carried on by him .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
..... having access to a- schedule property through 'b' and 'c' schedule of properties only and there is no other way. the parties are hindus governed by the hindu succession act, 1956. by virtue of section 22 of the act, if any co-sharer intends to alienate his or her share, the other sharer has got a preferential right to acquire the share proposed to be alienated. the ..... paternal uncle of the plaintiff and in between them, the question of right of preemption would not arise as they are not class-i heirs. therefore, the provisions of section 22 of the hindu succession act do not apply. in that view, the claim of right of preemption is untenable.18. in view of the same, the findings of the trial court is sound and ..... the oral and documentary evidence, decreed the suit in so far as the second relief is concerned, but declined to grant the relief of enforcement of preferential right under section 22 of the hindu succession act. the appellant/1st defendant, 2nd respondent/ 2nd defendant and the 3rd defendant filed an appeal in as.no.177/2004 against the said decree in so far as the ..... filed by the respondent herein and granted mandatory injunction in favour of the respondents/ plaintiffs to purchase the 'b' and 'c' schedule of property under preemption right since section 22(1) of the hindu succession act cannot be exercised after partition between the co-heirs?"7. admittedly, one thangaiah nadar was the original owner of the suit properties and he had three sons, namely .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1997)115PLR576
..... to entertain the application.3. from the above pleadings of the parties the trial court framed the following issues :-1) whether this court is competent to entertain petition under section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956? opa.2) whether the petition is maintainable in the present form opa.3) relief.4. on the conclusion of the proceedings, issue no. 1 was decided in ..... the court of senior sub judge, karnal who dismissed the application of the petitioners smt. sobha rani and smt. pushpa rani daughters of sh. pran nath, advocate, under section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956. the pleadings of the parties can be summarised in the following manner :-both the petitioner smt. shobha rani and smt. pushpa rani are the daughters of shri pran ..... favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. however, issue no. 2 was decided against the petitioners and it was held that their petition under section 22 of the hindu succession act was not maintainable. ..... . shila wanti, respondent no. 2 had only l/5th share. it was also asserted by the petitioners that in view of the statutory right conferred upon them under section 22 of the hindu succession act, they have got a preferential right to acquire 3/5th share in that property belonging to respondents no. 2 to 4. with the above averments, the petitioners prayed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(5)ALLMR728; 2007(6)BomCR319; 2007(6)MhLj706
..... the alienations were made and what is the purport of expression 'any one of such heir proposed to a transfer his or her interest' as used in sub-section (1) of section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956.8. the fact that the plaintiff and defendant no. 1 are the only legal heirs left by deceased yedba is undisputed. he died intestate. the fact that ..... the defendants appeal whereas allowed the appeal preferred by the plaintiff.7. the only question involved is whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim right of pre-emption under section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956. though no substantial question of law is formulated and framed, yet i deem it proper to proceed on the assumption that the question whether the right of preemption ..... as the legal heir of the deceased yedba and further claimed remaining half share alienated by her mother, in the exercise of her right of pre-emption available under section 22 of the hindu succession act, 1956. she was ready and willing to pay half of the consideration amount in lieu of the said share. the trial court partly decreed the suit holding that the ..... on consideration of the merits, i find it difficult to interfere with the findings of the first appellate court.5. original plaintiff anjanabai claimed right of pre-emption available under section 22 of hindu succession act, 1956. admittedly, she is entitled to half share in the suit land. she is daughter of original defendant no. 1 trivenibai. the relationship would be clear from the following .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1996KAR3499; 1996(6)KarLJ139
..... question first to be considered in this appeal is: whether the plaintiff has been entitled to any right of preferential acquisition under section 22 of hindu succession act. section 22 of the hindu succession act reads as under:22.(1):- 'where, after the commencement of this act, an interest in any immovable property of an intestate, or in any business carried on by him or her, whether solely ..... suit for decree for declaration declaring that the plaintiff 4s entitled to exercise the right of preemption, i.e., right of preferential acquisition of suit property under section 22 of hindu succession act, i.e., act no. 30 of 56, in respect of one half share in the suit schedule properties and for further direction to defendant no. 2, that is, respondent ..... that plaintiff was entitled to any right of pre-emption, or preferential acquisition, instead, asserted that plaintiff was not entitled to claim any such right either under section 22 of hindu succession act or as right of pre-emption. the defendants further asserted that plaintiff was not entitled to decree for permanent injunction and there has been no cause of action ..... was invalid being in breach of section 22 of hindu succession act and so 2nd defendant, did not derive any right, title, interest in the suit schedule properties under the said so called gift deed. plaintiff claimed himself to be entitled to exercise the preferential right to acquire the property under section 22 of act no. 30 of 1956 and preferred the claim to have .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Guwahati
..... of ourshare.......' 7. on the basis of these facts and circumstances the appellants/defendants filed an application (annexure-iii) under section 22 of the hindu succession act 1956 read with section 151, cpc in the aforesaid title suit stating that the transfer or allotment of the said property or any part of it ..... (i) of the act ..... 22(i) of the hindu succession act,1956. the aim and objection of such legislation is to keep the ancestral dwelling houseintact for peaceful use and occupation, ofproperty by the co-sharers. it is further; thestand of the appellants that after partition ofthe property co-sharers will not be entitled toexercise their preferential right of purchase asenvisaged in section 22(i) of hindu succession act, and therefore, the petition undersection 22 ..... and settled as per the letter (annexure ii). objection was raised by the respondents on the ground that the provisions under section 22(i) of the hindu succession act was not applicable in the case and that sale of immovable property cannot take place without prior permission of the state .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2000(2)CTC159; (2000)IIMLJ275
..... of the learned judge on the ground that as the appellant has expressed his inability to exercise his right of pre-emption as per section 22 of the hindu succession act and as the transaction has already been materialised into the sale deed, the appellant is not entitled to have a preferential right to acquire ..... also argued that the appellant has only suggested the mode of division and it would not bar the appellant from exercising his right under section 22 of the hindu succession act. he has further argued that there is no basis for the finding of the learned judge that the appellant has expressed his inability to ..... has framed the issue as to the maintainability of the suit. the learned single judge has come to the conclusion that a reading of section 22 of the hindu succession act makes it clear that if any person dies intestate leaving behind more than one heir specified in class i of the schedule and if ..... favour of the seventh defendant was effected as early as 29.1.1996, that the present suit has been filed claiming preferential right under section 22 of the hindu succession act, after a long delay that the plaintiff has also filed o.s.no.1053 of 1996 in the city civil court, madras, for injunction ..... is an utter stranger to the family, by a sale deed dated 29.1.1996. the sale deed is contrary to the provisions of section 22 of the hindu succession act. the plaintiff has got a preferential right to acquire the interest of the defendants 1 to 6 and 7th defendant cannot get title to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1997Bom201; 1998(2)BomCR453; 1996(2)MhLj770
..... intestate than in that circumstance the female heirs are entitled to claim partition of the dwelling house and the bar or embargo provided in section 23 of hindu succession act, 1956 will not apply. it can be demonstrated by the facts in the present case that the plaintiff/respondent is a daughter of gulabsing ..... is admitted position that the plaintiff/respondent is only class i heir entitled to 1/4th share of her father. however, section 23 of hindu succession act, 1956 makes it clear that -- where hindu intestate has left surviving him or her both male and female heirs specified in class i of the schedule and his ..... and decree passed by both lower courts in favour of respondent so far as house property is concerned is contrary to s. 23 of hindu succession act, 1956. according to her house property included in the present suit is a dwelling house, wherein appellants, who are male coparceners of the said family ..... i heir only. in the result, i hold that there is no bar of section 23 for claiming share and ..... subsequent provisions deal with the rights of heir of the deceased. in this view of the matter section 23 has been drafted by the legislature. the other section which can be equally pointed out is section 22 creating a preferential right to acquire interest of class i heirs inter se is available to class .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1999P& H254
..... claim a decree to be passed in his favour in respect of the preferential right that was conferred on chalti devi under section 22 of the hindu succession act.16. even assuming for argument's sake that the preferential right conferred under section 22 of the hindu succession act is heritable and the legal heirs of chalti devi can claim that right, that preferential right, the 1st respondent purshottam dass ..... refer to the decision of the kerala high court in valliyil sreedevi amma v. subhadra devi, air 1976 kerala 19, wherein it has been held that where sub-section (1) of section 22 of the hindu succession act does not provide any special procedure for seeking the remedy, the ordinary procedure for enforcement of any civil right has to be resorted to by the co-heirs ..... a preferential right on class-i heirs to purchase the interest in the immovable property proposed to be transferred. sub-section (1) of section 22 of the hindu succession act confers a substantial preferential right while sub-section (2) of section 22 of the act gives a right to the parties to file an application for determination of the consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased ..... that the right to sue docs not survive to his heirs.'14. the decision of the full bench of the allahabad high court in mohd. ismail v. abdul rashid, air 1956 all 1, is also to the same effect.15. a reference may also be made to another decision of allahabad high court in puri ram v. durga, (1907) ilr 30 .....Tag this Judgment!