Property purchased by govt servant in the name of his son

Vathsala Manickavasagam v. N. Ganesan, (2013) 9 SCC 152
Family and Personal Laws
Hindu Law
Joint family property (held benami) or exclusive property of defendant - Determination of - Tacit admission of defendant
that suit properties were purchased by his father in his name for which he was not responsible, nor was he interested in
having them for himself - Onus on defendant to disprove it - Gift of one of the suit properties (house) by deceased owner
in favour of defendant son, claimed by defendant, gift to him not established by him by proving ingredients of gift under
S. 122 TPA - House tax in respect of that property paid by family members of deceased owner - Purchase of other suit
property by defendant by selling wife's jewellery as well as from funds advanced by his father-in-law, claimed by
defendant, also not proved by adducing reliable evidence -
Evidence of deceased owner's widow that properties were
purchased by her husband in name of his eldest son (defendant) after deliberation in order to avoid service conditions of
her husband who was a government officer - Held, onus not discharged by defendant by disproving his admission -
Hence, admission binding on him under S. 17 of Evidence Act - Suit properties belonged to joint family of deceased
owner, hence liable to be partitioned, (2013) 9 SCC 152-A
Evidence Act, 1872
S. 17 - Admission - Constitutes substantial piece of evidence for proving facts incorporated therein - Binding effect -
Onus on person making admission to explain it - In case of his failure to disprove his admission, facts admitted would be
presumed to be true and binding on maker of admission - Admission must be clear, certain and definite, (2013) 9 SCC
152-B
Property Law
Transfer of Property Act, 1882
S. 122 - Gift - Ingredients - Property purchased by a father in his son's name - After father's death, in a suit for partition
of that property, son in his written statement claimed that property was gifted to him by his father - No evidence led in
support of his claim of gift - Held, ingredients of S. 122 not established - Merely because property was purchased in son's
name, it cannot be held on basis of ipse dixit statement made in written statement that there was a valid gift in son's
favour, without any other evidence supporting that claim, (2013) 9 SCC 152-C
Constitution of India
Art. 136 - Question of law - Total misreading of evidence, held, gives rise to a question of law, (2013) 9 SCC 152-D

Print Page