Under the rule stated by the Telangana High Court Full Bench in Anumolu Nageswara Rao v. A.V.R.L.…
In Anumolu Nageswara Rao v. A.V.R.L. Narasimha Rao, the Telangana High Court Full Bench distinguished an undivided interest held with other coparceners from property already…
Choose your answer
Under the rule stated by the Telangana High Court Full Bench in Anumolu Nageswara Rao v. A.V.R.L. Narasimha Rao, what happens on valid adoption to a Mitakshara coparcener’s undivided interest in property held with other coparceners in the birth family?
Answer and explanation
Correct answer A
In Anumolu Nageswara Rao v. A.V.R.L. Narasimha Rao, the Telangana High Court Full Bench distinguished an undivided interest held with other coparceners from property already vested before adoption. Under Section 12 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the former ends when the birth-family tie is severed. The proviso protects already vested property, including an allotted share from an earlier partition or property held by a sole surviving coparcener, subject to applicable obligations.
Option feedback
Option A
The Full Bench held that the undivided interest ends when adoption severs the coparcenary tie to the family of birth.
Option B
Proviso (b) to Section 12 protects already vested property with its obligations. The Full Bench distinguished a fluctuating interest held with other coparceners.
Option C
The Full Bench held that this undivided interest ends. Property already vested remains subject to the obligations attached to it.
Option D
Adoption does not itself partition the birth family’s coparcenary or allot a separate share.
Practice for these exams
-
IIT Kharagpur LL.M. Entrance
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
Assam Higher Judicial Service
-
CUET PG Law (LL.M.)
Subject revision
-
Bihar Judicial Services
Subject revision
-
Uttarakhand Judicial Services
Subject revision