In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that an Arbitrator conducting a family property partition exceeded his jurisdiction. The Arbitrator was instructed to determine whether 99 diamonds and an emerald ring were streedhana (wife's separate property) of Respondent No.1. Though the Arbitrator found they were streedhana property, he incorrectly ruled that she relinquished her rights by having them handed over in a 1971 partition award. The Court held that once streedhana property is established, the Arbitrator should not have permitted others to retain it based on prior partition arrangements. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the High Court's judgment.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.