MASTER SUSHANT (MINOR) Vs. SH. SUNDER SHYAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit filed by the plaintiff -Master Sushant (minor) through his natural guardian and mother against his father Sh. Sunder Shyam Singh. The suit is a suit for partition and rendition of accounts. As per the averments which have been made in the plaint, the plaintiff's father i.e. the defendant received in his hands ancestral properties and therefore plaintiff becomes a coparcener and entitled to the share from the properties which have been inherited by the defendant -Sh. Sunder Shyam Singh from his father Sh. Joginder Singh. Admittedly, Sh. Joginder Singh/grandfather died on 14.11.1999.

(2.) PRIOR to passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 if any person inherited ancestral properties, the ancestral properties in his hands automatically were HUF properties and to which the successors by four degrees automatically took a share. However, after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 merely because a person receives property from his paternal ancestors, the property in his hands is not an HUF property but the inheritance is as self -acquired property unless at the time of devolution there existed an HUF. The Supreme Court has specifically laid down this ratio in the judgments in the cases of Commissioner of Wealth Tax Etc. Vs. Chander Sen Etc. : AIR 1986 SC 1753 and Yudhishter Vs. Ashok Kumar : AIR 1987 SC 558 by observing that merely because a person who receives ancestral properties after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the person who inherits will not receive the properties as HUF properties but as self -acquired properties i.e. ancestral properties did not automatically have the stamp of HUF properties. The only exception would be if a person after receiving self -acquired properties, he creates an HUF and in which case the members of the HUF including the sons would have rights to the HUF properties.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , on the admitted facts contained in the plaint, the plaintiff has no legal right to sue. The plaint since does not disclose a cause of action, the same is therefore rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). Parties are left to bear their own costs. Since the suit stands disposed of, all the pending applications also stand disposed of.