In Brief
A dispute arose over a one-acre non-agricultural property allegedly sold by the father of the respondents to the appellant in 1987 for ₹15,000. When respondents interfered with the appellant's possession, the appellant sued for permanent injunction. The respondents countersued claiming the sale deed was void. The trial court upheld the sale, but the appellate courts reversed this, finding the sale lacked legal necessity for the joint family and that the attesting witness denied his involvement. The High Court directed return of the property with refund of consideration. The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's appeal, holding that the purchaser failed to prove legal necessity for the sale of joint family property.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.