Property purchased by father from his salaried income - Such property inherited by his sons by succession - Not a joint Hindu Family property

Citation 

AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 1808

2007 AIR SCW 3018

2007(1) CTCOL 618

2007(23) CTCOL 544

SUPREME COURT

(From : AIR 2003 Punj and Har 142)

B. P. SINGH , J. and H. S. BEDI , J.

Civil Appeal No. 4446 with 4455 of 2005, D/- 30 - 3 - 2007

Makhan Singh (D) by LRs.v. Kulwant Singh

(A)Civil P.C. (5 of 1908), S.100 - Second appeal - Concurrent finding of facts - Error as to onus of proof - Interference justifiable. The interference of the High Court in second appeal should be clearly minimal and would not extend

to a mere re-appraisal of the evidence. If High Court on an appreciation of the evidence takes a view different from that of the Trial Court and the first appellate Court, the exercise would be clearly

unjustified but where the High Court has not made a simpliciter re-appraisal of the evidence to arrive at conclusions different from those of the Courts below, but has corrected an error as to the onus of

proof on the existence or otherwise of a Joint Hindu Family property the interference with concurrent finding of fact by the High Court in second appeal is justifiable.(Paras 7 , 9) 

(B) HINDU LAW - SUCCESSION - Hindu Law - Joint Hindu Family - Property purchased by father from his salaried income - Such property inherited by his sons by succession - Not a joint Hindu Family property. AIR 2003 P and H 142, Reversed. Hindu Succession Act (30 of

1956), S.8