In Brief
A son challenged his father's sale of ancestral family property to third parties, claiming the father (Karta) lacked authority without his consent. The Supreme Court upheld the sale, holding that a father has power under Hindu law to sell ancestral property when legal necessity exists—here, to discharge family debts and fund agricultural improvements. The court found the defendants proved legal necessity, and once established, a coparcener son cannot challenge such alienation. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision upholding the sale's validity.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.