top of page
Judge Gavel
Search

Supreme Court Clarifies Marumakkathayam Law on Property Devolution Post-Partition

Writer's picture: Legal Soch FoundationLegal Soch Foundation
2 min read

The Supreme Court of India recently clarified the devolution of property under Kerala's traditional Marumakkathayam law. In the case Ramachandran & Ors. vs. Vijayan & Ors., the bench comprising Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol ruled that property acquired by a Hindu woman post-partition, in the absence of a legal heir, constitutes her separate property and not tharwad (joint family) property.


The bench addressed two key questions: whether property obtained by a female and her children post-partition remains tharwad property or becomes separate property, and whether property acquired by a single woman post-partition, without legal heirs, should be treated as joint or individual property.


The Court extensively analyzed the Kerala High Court’s Full Bench judgment in Mary Cheriyan & Anr. v. Bhargavi Pillai Bhasura Devi & Anr. (1967). The majority opinion in the earlier judgment treated such property as tharwad property, preserving potential claims by future members through birth or adoption. However, the minority view asserted that property allocated to a single woman during partition becomes her separate property, even if she later has children.


Justice Karol, in the judgment, endorsed the minority opinion, emphasizing that partition inherently transforms joint ownership into individual ownership. The Court held that post-partition, the property allocated to a Hindu female becomes her separate property, regardless of subsequent changes in her family structure.


Illustrating this with an example, the Court noted that partition dissolves the joint nature of property, allocating individual ownership to separated members. However, in the present case, since the woman in question had a legal heir at the time of partition, the property was deemed part of the tharwad.


The ruling has significant implications for property rights under the Marumakkathayam system, reaffirming the principle that partition ends joint ownership and establishes individual rights over allocated shares.


Appearances:

Senior Advocates CS Vaidyanathan and Chitambaresh represented the appellants, while Advocate Vishnu Shankar led the respondent's counsel team.




Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page