In Brief
A. Dharmalingam purchased undivided shares in a property from two brothers (Defendant Nos. 1 and 2) through sale deeds in 1975. He sued for a declaration of his ownership share and partition. The trial court awarded him half the property, but the appellate court reduced this because the four sons of Defendant No. 1 were not party to the suit. The High Court confirmed the lower appellate court's decision. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts' reasoning but corrected a computational error: Dharmalingam's actual entitlement was 7/24 (not 5/24) of the property. The appeals were allowed with this correction.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.