In Brief
A purchaser of property originally sold by three sons of Chikkanna challenged a lower court order treating it as joint family property. The appellant argued the sale had severed the property from joint family character. The Supreme Court held that a compromise reached at the Execution Appeal stage between only some parties cannot bind members of the joint family (including unborn members) who were not parties to it. The property retained its joint family character in the hands of those entitled to it, and the compromise could not defeat the inheritance rights of the excluded members. Appeal dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.