The Supreme Court holds that there is no prohibition to effect a partition otherwise than through an instrument in writing by duly complying with the requirement of law.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7374 OF 2008

H. VASANTHI                                                                                                                                                                               … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

A. SANTHA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS                                                                                                           … RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T

S.V.N. BHATTI, J.

1. We have heard learned Senior Counsel Shri A.N. Venugopala Gowda and Counsel Shri P.B. Suresh for the appellant and the respondents, respectively.

2. Plaintiff in OS No. 746 of 1996 City Civil Court, Chennai, is the appellant. OS No. 746 of 1996 was filed for the relief of declaration that the plaintiff with Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 is a coparcener by amended Section 29A of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (Tamil Nadu Amendment Act). Therefore, the plaintiff has a right to a one-third share in the suitscheduled property at 24/1, Gomathy Narayanaswamy Road, T-Nagar, Madras-600017. She prayed for an injunction, restraining Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 etc., from disposing of one-third part claimed by the plaintiff to third parties. The plaintiff also prayed for partition and separate possession of one-third in the plaint schedule through a preliminary and a final Decree. The prayers in the plaint are comprehensive enough for declaration, injunction, partition, and separate possession for the plaintiff’s one-third share in the plaint schedule property. To avoid repetitive description of the property, which may arise during and in the course of consideration by us, we excerpt the schedule as under:

Read More