Court redefines maintenance claims as profit-sharing in an ongoing partition dispute involving married sisters and their brother.
In a landmark judgment, the Karnataka High Court has ruled on a contentious issue in a partition suit involving married sisters and their brother. The court, presided over by Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde, has determined that while a claim for interim maintenance by the sisters against their brother might not be traditionally maintainable, the application can be construed as a request for sharing profits derived from the ancestral property.
The case, Dyamappa v. Smt. Bhimavva Basavantappa Kadannavar, revolved around a suit for partition filed by the sisters, who sought interim maintenance from their brother, alleging deprivation of income from ancestral properties. The trial court had previously granted a monthly maintenance of Rs. 4,000 to each sister, prompting an appeal from the brother who contended that the plaintiffs, being married, could not claim maintenance from him and should instead pursue mesne profits.
Justice Hegde, in a detailed oral order dated November 25, 2025, clarified that the proper legal remedy lies in the sharing or depositing of profits derived from the property, not maintenance per se. The judge highlighted that the suit properties are ancestral and have not been partitioned, thus entitling the sisters to a share in the profits, given their constructive joint possession.
The judgment further emphasized that the possession of one co-owner implies constructive possession by other co-owners, thereby entitling them to profits derived from the property. The court acknowledged the impracticality of waiting for a final decree, which could delay the realization of profits, and thus directed the brother to share the profits with the sisters as an interim measure.
In a move to ensure fairness, the court ordered that 50% of the interim amount be paid to the plaintiffs, while the remaining 50% be kept in a deposit until the suit's conclusion. The sisters are required to provide an undertaking to repay the amount with interest if the suit is dismissed.
The decision marks a progressive step in partition suits, potentially curbing delaying tactics and encouraging dispute resolution. It underscores the court's inherent power to direct interim measures in property disputes, aligning with principles of fairness and equity.
Bottom Line:
In a suit for partition, an order for interim maintenance to married sisters (plaintiffs) against their brother (defendant) may not be maintainable as "maintenance," but the Court may construe it as a direction to share or deposit the profits derived from the suit property, subject to the final result of the suit.
Statutory provision(s):
- Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 2(12)
