{"id":328596,"date":"2024-08-13T16:00:05","date_gmt":"2024-08-13T10:30:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=328596"},"modified":"2024-08-21T15:59:03","modified_gmt":"2024-08-21T10:29:03","slug":"a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/","title":{"rendered":"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Madhya Pradesh High Court:<\/span> In a petition filed under Article 227<\/a> of Constitution of India<\/a> seeking the quashment of the Civil Judge’s order restraining the petitioners from raising construction on the disputed land and the District Judge’s order affirming the Civil Judge’s order, a single-judge bench of G.S. Ahluwalia, J., upheld the orders restraining the petitioners from raising construction on the disputed land, citing the doctrine of lis pendens and the nature of the property as potentially being Joint Hindu Family property.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

In the instant matter, the petitioners purchased land through a series of transactions originating from a sale deed executed on 10-05-2012 by defendants No. 1 and 2. The respondents filed a civil suit in 2012 seeking a declaration that the property in dispute was ancestral, and that various Wills and sale deeds related to the property were null and void. The respondents also sought partition and a permanent injunction. The Civil Judge, vide order dated 15-05-2014, granted a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from creating third-party rights. This injunction lapsed after a year. Subsequent sale transactions were made, including sales to the petitioners after the initial temporary injunction lapsed.<\/p>\n

The Civil Judge, vide order dated 03-11-2022, restrained the petitioners from raising construction on the disputed land and later the District Judge, vide order dated 18-04-2023, affirmed the Civil Judge’s order. Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the Civil Judge and District Judge, the petitioners filed the present petition under Article 227 seeking relief from these orders.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Whether the sale deeds executed during the pendency of the civil suit, when no temporary injunction was in force, should still be governed by the provisions of Section 52<\/a> of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882<\/a>?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    Whether a specific piece of land, allegedly part of a Joint Hindu Family property, be alienated?<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Parties’ Contentions<\/p>\n

    The petitioners argued that since the sale transactions were made when no temporary injunction was in force, the balance of convenience favored them, and they should not be restrained from constructing on their land. However, the respondents argued that the property was ancestral, no partition had taken place, and thus the sale deeds executed during the pendency of the suit were subject to the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. The respondents also argued that specific pieces of Joint Hindu Family property could not be alienated without proper partition.<\/p>\n

    Court’s Analysis<\/p>\n

    The Court emphasised that under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, any sale deed executed during the pendency of a suit would be subject to the final decree, irrespective of whether the purchaser was a party to the suit, meaning the purchasers (petitioners) were bound by the outcome of the ongoing litigation.<\/p>\n

    The Court held that if the disputed property was indeed Joint Hindu Family property, a specific piece of land could not be alienated by a coparcener or co-sharer without partition, and at the most, the petitioners could only claim a share in the property, not any specific portion of the land.<\/p>\n

    “Although a coparcener or co-sharer can alienate to the extent of his share but he cannot alienate any specific piece of land. Therefore, at the most the petitioners can be said to have purchased a share of coparceners\/Co-sharer still they are not entitled for any specific piece of land.”<\/p>\n

    Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

    The Court found no material illegality in the temporary injunction orders issued by the lower courts. The Court dismissed the petition and upheld the orders restraining the petitioners from raising construction on the disputed land, citing the doctrine of lis pendens and the nature of the property as potentially being Joint Hindu Family property.<\/p>\n

    [Ahamad Khan<\/span> v. Bhaskar Ddatt Pandey<\/span>, 2024 SCC OnLine MP 5157<\/a>, Decided on 02-08-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

    Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

    Shri Shitla Prasad Tripathi, Counsel for the Petitioners<\/p>\n

    Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

    \"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld orders restraining the petitioners from raising construction on the disputed land.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":317738,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[3589,43795,3801,45418,61228,7201],"class_list":["post-328596","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-alienation","tag-co-sharer","tag-coparcener","tag-joint-family-property","tag-justice-g-s-ahluwalia","tag-madhya-pradesh-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nA coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share: MP High Court | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-08-13T10:30:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-08-21T10:29:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/\",\"name\":\"A coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share: MP High Court | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-08-13T10:30:05+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-08-21T10:29:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Madhya Pradesh High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"A coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share: MP High Court | SCC Times","description":"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court","og_description":"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-08-13T10:30:05+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-08-21T10:29:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/","name":"A coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share: MP High Court | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-08-13T10:30:05+00:00","dateModified":"2024-08-21T10:29:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"MP High Court held that a coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property, can only claim a share.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Madhya Pradesh High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/13\/a-coparcener-cannot-alienate-specific-piece-of-joint-family-property-can-only-claim-a-share-mp-hc-scc-times\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Coparcener\/co-sharer cannot alienate specific piece of Joint Family Property without Partition: MP High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":237925,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/23\/hp-hc-suit-land-being-inherited-by-wife-through-will-lost-its-character-of-joint-hindu-coparcenary-property-in-view-of-s-14-of-hindu-succession-act-1956-court-denied-rights-to-ch\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":0},"title":"HP HC | Suit land being inherited by wife through \u2018Will\u2019 lost its character of Joint Hindu Coparcenary Property in view of S.14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956; Court denied rights to children","author":"Editor","date":"October 23, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Sandeep Sharma J., upheld the impugned judgment on merits. The facts of the case are such that the suit land is an ancestral property of late Prema who inherited the property from his late father, and after his (Prema\u2019s) death transferred the property through a will\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":222988,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/09\/mp-hc-writ-petition-against-a-private-individual-is-not-maintainable-reiterated\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":1},"title":"MP HC | Writ Petition against a private individual is not maintainable, reiterated","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 9, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J. while dismissing the petition, observed that the petitioners have an efficacious remedy of filing a Civil Suit against illegal possession of the land. In the instant case, reliefs in the nature of writ of certiorari was sought to be issued to declare the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":222589,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/11\/27\/mp-hc-incorrect-to-state-that-right-to-hold-property-is-a-fundamental-right-writ-petition-against-a-private-individual-not-maintainable\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":2},"title":"MP HC | Incorrect to state that right to hold property is a fundamental right; writ petition against a private individual not maintainable","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J. dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioners claiming that the Additional Director General of Police was unlawfully encroaching upon their land.\u00a0 The petitioners had claimed that they had approached the relevant authorities, but no action was taken by them. They subsequently filed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6626,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/04\/22\/right-of-co-sharers-in-joint-property-discussed\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":3},"title":"Right of co-sharers in joint property, discussed","author":"Sucheta","date":"April 22, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court- While deciding an appeal as to whether the suit land is partitioned or is still un-partitioned and in joint ownership of the parties to the suit and construction carried out by the defendant is justified or not, a bench of Dharam Chand Chaudhary J, held that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "High Courts"","block_context":{"text":"High Courts","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/highcourts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":203239,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/06\/suit-for-injunction-simpliciter-maintainable-where-one-co-owner-encroaches-upon-the-property-held-and-possessed-by-all-the-joint-owners\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":4},"title":"Suit for injunction simpliciter maintainable where one co-owner encroaches upon the property held and possessed by all the joint owners","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 6, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Sanjeev Kumar, J., dismissed a second appeal filed against the order of the appellate court. The appellant and the respondent were joint owners of a particular piece of property, both of them had constructed their respective houses on the same\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":326403,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/12\/determination-of-rightful-compensation-entitlement-requires-proper-adjudication-under-section-64-of-right-to-fair-compensation-actmp-high-court-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":328596,"position":5},"title":"Land Acquisition| Rightful Compensation claim requires proper adjudication under Section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation Act: MP High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"July 12, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"If a person is of the view that the compensation has been paid to a wrong person, then the same can be a ground for making reference under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/328596","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=328596"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/328596\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/317738"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=328596"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=328596"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=328596"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}