In Brief
A son sought to partition ancestral joint family property and claimed a one-third share in land sold by his father in 1983. The father had mortgaged the property in 1981 to pay family debts (Rs. 3,000 for family expenses) and later sold it for Rs. 6,700 to clear the mortgage. The son argued he was not bound by the sale deed as he never signed it. The Trial and Appellate Courts sided with the son, but the High Court reversed them, holding the sale was for legal family necessity. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court, ruling that a joint family manager can sell property to discharge debts incurred for family benefit, binding even non-signatory members. The Court also clarified that discussing evidence while answering substantial legal questions under Section 100 CPC does not constitute impermissible re-appreciation. Appeal dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.