A Hindu family is proved to be joint, but one member claims a house standing in his name is self-acquired. Which statement best reflects the burden of proof?
- A
The member in whose name property stands can never prove self-acquisition
- B
Separate residence conclusively proves partition of estate
- C
Jointness of family alone does not prove every property is joint; the party alleging joint family property must show nucleus or ancestral source
- D
Every property held by any member is automatically joint family property
View answer and explanation
Correct answer: C. Jointness of family alone does not prove every property is joint; the party alleging joint family property must show nucleus or ancestral source
Hindu law presumes jointness of family more readily than jointness of property. The party asserting joint family property must first prove the necessary foundation.
Source note: Singhal Family Law II Notes / Narendra Nath v. W.T. Commissioner