Bombay High Court: Krishnabai's Exclusive Right to Family Property Upheld

In a recent court case, Krishnabai Babya Navale successfully defended her right to a family property against her sister, Anubai Mahadeo Thali, who wanted a share of it. The Bombay High Court decided in favor of Krishnabai, focusing on important points about property rights and family inheritance.

Background: A Family Dispute Over Land

The argument was about a piece of land in Raigad, Maharashtra. Krishnabai and Anubai are daughters of Ramji Patil, who was officially allowed to use the land. After he died in 1949, the land was registered under their mother's name, Yenibai, and later under Krishnabai's name in 1957.

Legal Journey: From Lower Court to High Court

• Initial Suit: Anubai filed a lawsuit in 2002, asking for the land to be divided, claiming it was part of their father's property.
• Lower Court Decision (2006): The lower court decided in favor of Anubai, giving her a share.
• Appeal Court Decision (2017): Krishnabai appealed, but the appeal court agreed with the lower court's decision.
• Second Appeal (2025): Krishnabai took the case to the Bombay High Court, challenging the previous decisions.

Key Arguments: Ownership and Legal Steps

• Krishnabai's Stand: Her lawyer, Mr. Joshi, argued that Krishnabai had legally acquired the land under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, which was shown in the official records since 1961. He stressed that the land was Krishnabai's alone, not a shared family property.

"The land belonged to Krishnabai," argued Mr. Joshi.

• Anubai's Stand: Represented by Mr. Patwardhan, she claimed the land was a shared family property and that Krishnabai held it for all family members.

"The land remained shared family property," insisted Mr. Patwardhan.

Court's Verdict: A Win for Krishnabai

Judge Milind N. Jadhav decided in favor of Krishnabai, rejecting Anubai's claim. The court found that:

• Krishnabai had followed all the necessary steps to get the land.
• There was no proof that the land was used together as a family property.
• Anubai’s claim was not backed by enough evidence and was filed too late.

Summary of the Verdict

The court's decision shows how important it is to take legal action on time and to have clear documents in property disputes. Krishnabai's win confirms the legal process she followed, setting an example for similar cases. The court's decision shows how following the right legal steps can protect someone's property rights against claims of shared family ownership.

"The Second Appeal is allowed and resolved as stated above," concluded Judge Jadhav.

This ruling ends a long-standing family dispute, confirming Krishnabai's rights to the land.