Partition suit – Two properties – Malcha Marg property and Kamla Nagar property – Concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the High Court that there is nothing, even remotely, to indicate that the Malcha Marg property was bought out of joint family funds – Held that rightly it has been held to be the exclusive property of the respondents – As such, it has to rightly devolve on the LRs of ACK exclusively – As for as Kamla Nagar property is concerned the Court finds that the findings, unearthed during trial indicate that Rs.55,000/- was paid by the appellants’ side to the respondents’ side – There is nothing on record to indicate that it was paid for the upkeep of the HUF or on some other account or to fulfil some other purpose – The plea of the respondents that the said amount was for the upkeep of the HUF does not stand to reason for it is the admitted position that the respondents or their ancestors were never living in the Kamla Nagar property – Hence, there was no occasion for the appellants to contribute a heavy amount of Rs.55,000/- in the year 1979 for the upkeep and/or maintenance of the said property to the respondents, when the same was exclusively being enjoyed by the appellants, who alone would be liable for its maintenance – Moreover, there being disclosure by ACK in his Wealth Tax Returns of the years 1964-1967showing the valuation of the property to be aroundRs.38,000/- and payment having been made in 1979 of Rs.55,000/-does not indicate that it was undervalued as there has been a marked increase in the valuation from Rs.38,000/- to Rs.1,10,000/- and payment made of 50% i.e.,Rs.55,000/-, in 1979,that too in a family settlement between ACK and RKK cannot be labelled a totally sham consideration – Further, the appellants having enjoyed possession right from the time the property was purchased and even letting out the premises to tenants and collecting/taking rent from the tenants without any claim raised at any point of time, would also support the claim that ACK had not claimed any right or title over any portion of the Kamla Nagar property during his lifetime – Impugned Judgment inasmuch as it relates to the Kamla Nagar property liable to be set aside and the Judgment and Decree passed by the Additional District Judge stands restored – It is further held that the appellants are the exclusive owners of the Kamla Nagar property – Impugned Judgment insofar as it relates to Malcha Marg property upheld. (Para 18 to 22)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2024 STPL(Web) 182 SC
[2024 INSC 224]
Jugal Kishore Khanna (D) Thr Lrs & Anr Vs. Sudhir Khanna & Ors.
Civil Appeal No. 1591 of 2020 With Civil Appeal No.1592 of 2020-Decided On 19-03-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPLWeb-182-SC.pdf
