Dorairaj v. Doraisamy (Dead) through LRs & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 126) was decided by the Supreme Court of India on 5 February 2026 by a Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. The dispute arose from a suit for partition of 79 agricultural properties belonging to a Hindu joint family, where the plaintiff claimed that the properties were ancestral or acquired from joint family income managed by the Karta, while the defendant asserted that several properties were self-acquired through independent earnings and relied upon sale deeds and a Will executed shortly before the Karta’s death to claim exclusive ownership. The Supreme Court held that once the existence of ancestral income-yielding property is established, the burden shifts to the person asserting self-acquisition to prove an independent source of funds, and that properties purchased in the name of the Karta during the subsistence of the joint family ordinarily retain a joint character. The Court further held that alienations by the Karta are binding only when supported by proved legal necessity and that suspicious circumstances surrounding the execution of a Will vitiate its evidentiary value. Upholding the High Court’s item-wise evaluation of properties, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals with minor modifications and maintained the partition as determined.

Legal Issue

Determination of when property acquired in the name of a family member retains the character of joint Hindu family property. Scope of burden of proof once existence of ancestral income-yielding property is shown. Validity of alienations by Karta in favour of a coparcener and evidentiary standard for proving legal necessity. Effect of suspicious circumstances on proof of a Will in coparcenary property disputes.

Brief Facts

Dispute concerned partition of 79 agricultural properties belonging to a Hindu joint family descending from a common ancestor. Plaintiff sought partition claiming properties were ancestral or purchased from joint family income managed by the Karta (father). Defendant contended several properties were self-acquired through independent income and supported alienations made in his favour. A Will executed shortly before the father’s death and multiple sale deeds were relied upon to claim exclusive ownership. Trial Court granted partial share; appellate courts modified shares and excluded certain properties; matter reached the Supreme Court.

Court’s Reasoning

Mere existence of joint family does not automatically make all properties joint, but once ancestral property capable of generating income is established, the burden shifts to the person asserting self-acquisition to prove independent source of funds. Properties purchased in the name of the Karta during subsistence of joint family ordinarily retain joint character unless clear evidence shows otherwise; precise tracing of funds by other coparceners is not required under Hindu law. Independent earnings of the Karta do not by themselves negate the contribution of joint family nucleus where circumstances indicate pooled resources. Separate enjoyment, borrowings or irrigation improvements do not constitute partition without clear intention to sever joint status. Alienations by the Karta are binding only when supported by proved legal necessity; vague recitals or intra-family transfers are insufficient to bind other coparceners. Sale transactions executed as guardian of minors required strict scrutiny and could not automatically convert joint property into exclusive ownership. The alleged Will was surrounded by suspicious circumstances - thumb impression despite habitual signature, execution shortly before death, doubtful scribe presence, and therefore failed proof requirements.High Court’s item-wise evaluation and limited exclusion of certain properties purchased from third parties reflected correct application of settled partition principles.

Decision

Supreme Court upheld High Court findings with minor modifications. Appeals dismissed; partition determination maintained except for properties already excluded as self-acquired. No costs awarded.

Access the Official Judgment here

Case Title

Dorairaj v. Doraisamy (Dead) through LRs & Ors.

Neutral Citation

2026 INSC 126

Court

Supreme Court of India

Bench

Justice Sanjay Karol

Justice Satish Chandra Sharma

Date of Judgment

05 February 2026