The Supreme Court upheld a Madras High Court ruling stating a Karta cannot transfer joint family property to one member without genuine necessity. Such alienations are only binding on other ...

On February 5, 2026, the Supreme Court of India upheld the judgement of Madras High Court, which stated that alienations (partitions or transfers) in favour of one co-parcener cannot bind others ...

The occurrence of dementia in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) was only widely recognized in the late 20 th century. Hitherto, it was believed that dementia was a rare event due to the fortuitous ...

The Supreme Court addressed the sale of HUF land by its Karta, Sharanappa, challenged by his first son. The court overturned the High Court's decision, affirming the Trial Court's view that the sale ...

A bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Joymalya Bagchi upheld dismissal of a suit filed by Kashiraya-plaintiff against his father defendant-Sharanappa for the 1995 sale of a land parcel in Kalaburgi's ...

Hyderabad: As the Telangana high court recently cleared the way for processing applications filed under Sadabainama, the revenue department has issued a notification to process over nine lakh ...

More than six months after the Putnam County Commissioners denied a request to rezone 200 acres in Warren Township to make way for a limestone quarry, the petitioners were back at the most recent ...

Vijayawada: The state govt has taken a tough stance against the proposed Ramanaidu Studios in Visakhapatnam, directing the district collector to issue a show-cause notice to the promoters, Suresh ...

The Andhra Pradesh government has issued a show-cause notice to M/s Suresh Production Private Limited for trying to obtain permission for a residential layout on 15.17 acres of the 34.44 acres of land ...

What would be the best recourse or remedy for a coparcener of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) who is not being given his rightful share of income by the Karta in connivance with other coparceners?

The fundamental question in this case was whether Article 58 of the Limitation Act applied to the present case and whether the first defendant's property transfer in favour of the second defendant was ...