As regards jointness, it is not in dispute that the property has devolved on three sons by virtue of will executed by their father. The will demarcates the portion allotted to each son. There is a specific averment in the plaint that the father had divided the property between three brothers by virtue of the will. It is further stated that family of each brother was in occupation of the specific portion allotted to him by virtue of the will. Thus, separate identifiable portions in the suit house were bequeathed by the father in favour of each son. There is clear demarcation of share of each son in the will. It is, therefore, clear that the brothers got three separately demarcated shares in the suit property by virtue of the will. The will vested each brother with a separate share in the suit property and each brother received separate possession thereof. The plaintiffs and defendant Nos.4 to 13 are descendants of the said three brothers. The suit house, therefore, cannot be said to be a joint family dwelling house of the three sons. The contention is fortified by the plaint averments. The only contention in the plaint with respect to the suit property being joint residential house is that the same was jointly mutated in the records of City Survey Department and Nagpur Municipal Corporation. It is well settled that the mutation entries are merely for fiscal purposes and by themselves cannot determine the nature of property held by a co-owner. The contention that the property is joint, is sufficiently negated by the contents of the will and other averments in the plaint. {Para 20}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)
Second Appeal No. 91 of 2025
Decided On: 16.10.2025
Saroj and Ors. Vs. Umesh and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R.W. Joshi, J.
Citation: 2025:BHC-NAG:11283, MANU/MH/6940/2025.
Read full judgment here :Click here.
Print Page