AIR 2005 KARNATAKA 393 ::2006 (1) ABR (NOC) 65 (KAR) ::2005 AIR Kant HCR 2333 ::2005 AIHC 4155 ::(2006) 1 HinduLR 314 ::(2006) 1 CivLJ 526 ::(2006) 1 CurCC 585 ::(2005) 3 KCCR 2100 ::(2005) 35 AllIndCas 322 (KAR)

Karnataka High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): V. G. Sabhahit , J

Hindu Law - Partition - Can be effected between the members of the joint family either under a partition deed or by referring the matter to panchayatdars - There can also be oral partition - No averment in written statement as to who were panchayatdars and as to whether panchayat took place and whether there was any palu patti or joint wardi prepared at time of alleged panchayat and oral partition - Entries made in record of rights would not prove partition by metes and bounds - Mere fact that parties have been in separate possession and enjoyment of properties belonging to family - Would not by itself lead to inference of partition by metes and bounds - There is strong presumption in favour of jointness of family - Regrant of land in favour of any of members of joint family would ensure to benefit of family. (Para 14)