Property inherited from father by sons becomes Joint Family Property in the hands of sons

The apex court again reiterated that share which a coparcener obtains on
partition of ancestral property is ancestral as regards his male issue.
The judgement was delivered by the Apex Court in the matter of
Doddamuniyappa (Dead) Through LRs Vs. Muniswamy & Ors. in Civil Appeal
No(s). 7141 of 2008 decided on 01.07.2019.
Challenge
The respondent Muniswamy and five other, the plaintiffs are the grandchildren
of one Chikkanna, the propositus of a joint family. They filed a suit in 1980
seeking a declaration that a compromise executed by their father along with his
two brothers with one Dodamuniyappa was not binding on them. The impugned
compromise was made in an execution appeal, whereby the father and uncles of
the plaintiffs agreed to convey a portion of joint family property to the
appellant.
The property was originally purchased by Chikkanna upon whose demise,
property devolved upon his three sons, including father of the plaintiffs. They
sold the property to another person in 1950. The sale deed however contained a
clause of re-conveyance, stipulating that the purchaser should re-convey the
property in the event of future sale. Without honouring the conveyance clause,
the purchaser sold the property to Dodamuniyappa in 1962. In order to enforce
the re-conveyance clause, the sons of Chikkanna filed suit in 1964. It was
decreed and a deed of re-conveyance was executed and the possession was
delivered in 1974. After that an execution appeal was filed by Dodamuniyappa.
At the stage of execution appeal, a compromise was entered, restoring part of

the property to Dodamuniyappa. The Plaintiffs challenged the compromise
contending that the compromise cannot bind them as it was executed without
their knowledge.
The trial court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiffs failed to establish
that the property was joint family property in their hands. This was reversed by
the High Court in appeal and the suit was decreed declaring the compromise as
not binding.

Held
Relying on the judgement of Smt, Dipo vs. Wassan Singh (1983) 3 SCC 376,
the Supreme Court held that the property inherited from the father by his sons
becomes joint family property in the hands of the sons. The Court reiterated that
a person inheriting property from three immediate paternal ancestors holds it,
and must hold it, in coparcenary with his sons, sons’ sons and sons’ sons’ sons
but as regards other relations he holds it and is entitled to hold it as his absolute
property. The share which a coparcener obtains on partition of ancestral
property is ancestral as regards his male issue. They take interest in it by birth
whether they are in existence at the time of partition or are born subsequently.
Thus, in the facts of the present case, the Apex Court held that after re-
conveyance deed executed in 1974, the property assumed character of joint
family proper. Hence, it would be ancestral property in the hands of the
plaintiffs and compromise without their consent could not have been executed.