Son gets 1/8 share in father's property despite losing main land case

In a significant judgement, the Madras High Court has ordered that a son be given a 1/8 share in his father's 3 acre 3 cent self-acquired land, even though the son had lost the case regarding other primary land disputes. According to a report by The Economic Times, this case was linked to a legal battle over family property between two brothers, Balakrishnan and Jayachandran.

According to the sequence of events, a person named Pachamuthu Pillai owned four pieces of land in Melapalayam. During a family partition in 1970, he received one Gram Natham land and three other plots. Additionally, he had separately purchased a large plot of 3 acre 3 cent. Thus, Pachamuthu Pillai held possession of a total of four lands, including three small plots, one Gram Natham land, and the large 3 acre 3 cent plot.

Pachamuthu Pillai had a total of seven children, including four sons named Balakrishnan, Jayachandran, Sukumaran, and Selvam. In 1984, Pachamuthu had orally partitioned the land between himself and his four sons. However, the 3 acre 3 cent large property and the Gram Natham land were not included in this partition. To record this oral partition, a 'Koor Chit' was prepared on May 22, 1984.

According to this Koor Chit, both Pachamuthu and Jayachandran received approximately 3/4 cent of land. Meanwhile, Sukumaran and Selvam received 391 square feet of land each. Balakrishnan was allotted approximately 360 square feet of land along with a road. Jayachandran had also built his house on the portion allotted to him.

The dispute began when, on May 29, 2000, Pachamuthu Pillai transferred his share of the land to Jayachandran through a 'Gift Settlement Deed'. Subsequently, on July 24, 2000, he executed a Will, in which the Gram Natham land was also reserved for Jayachandran. Consequently, Jayachandran received three parts: 3/4 cent from the 1984 partition, 3/4 cent of the father's share via the Gift Settlement Deed, and 382.5 square feet of Gram Natham land through the Will.

Dissatisfied with this, Balakrishnan challenged it in court. Balakrishnan's argument was that the father, Pachamuthu Pillai, had no right to give these lands to Jayachandran, as all these were joint family lands and could not be considered personal property. On the other hand, Jayachandran and other brothers opposed this argument. They informed the court that these lands fell under the 1984 oral partition and the division had already taken place in the presence of village panchayat members. Jayachandran presented the Koor Chit as evidence and argued that the Will had been legally completed.

The primary dispute before the court concerned the 1984 oral partition, the 2000 Gift Settlement Deed, the Will for the Gram Natham land, and the legality of the separate 3 acre 3 cent property. In the judgement delivered on September 18, 2026, the Madras High Court ruled that the 1984 partition was valid and the properties under it could not be reopened. Thus, Balakrishnan lost the main land case.

However, the court adopted a different approach regarding the 3 acre 3 cent self-acquired land. The court ordered that Balakrishnan would have a 1/8 share in this land. This case demonstrates that when a person possesses substantial assets and has a large family, it is advisable to partition the property among children during their lifetime to avoid disputes over assets after death.