You are on page 1of 1

Anil Kumar Mitra and ors.

v Ganendra Nath Mitra (1997) 9 SCC 725 It must be pleaded as a fact and proved that after the preliminary decree both the branches of the family were reunited and blended their shares and the parties treated and enjoyed the same as joint family property. In absence of such pleading and proof it cannot be said that the joint family continued to exist even after the decree. Bhagwan Dayal v Reoti Devi (1962) 3 SCR 440 The requisites for constitution of a joint family, its partition and the reunion have been laid down. One of the main issues is that whether reunion occurred or not? Also lays down the principles regarding the identity of any branch or sub-branch of a joint Hindu family as a joint family for the purposes of its incidents. It deals with the question that whether members of different branch of a joint hindu family can form a different joint hindu family for the purposes of holding a joint property and for the advantages of the incidents of a joint hindu family. Very well written judgement!