Mt dear friends,
Currently I am comncerned with the issue as to whether rthere can be sale of a minor's interets in the coparcenary property by the father/manager even wihout legal necessity. This docubt arose after readign the following proposition laid down bythe Madras High Court in the case of Vedambal vs Ponnarasi / S.A No.148 of 2011 decided on 30-06 -2011 and reported in https://indiankanoon.org/doc/160574/
" 21. In many places, it has been stated that the first defendant has acted as father/ manager of the so-called joint family. It is an archaic and pristine principle of law that if any transaction has been made by father/manager of a joint family, legal necessity need not be proved. In the instant case, Ex.B.1 has been executed by the first defendant as father/manager of the erstwhile so- called joint family. In Ex.B.1 it has been clearly stated that Ex.B.1 has come into existence for the purpose of discharging loan. Even though the second defendant has failed to prove the recitals found in Ex.B.1 with regard to discharging of loan, as per the settled principle of law, legal necessity need not be proved in case of sale or any transaction made by father/ manager and therefore the argument advanced on the side of the first respondent/plaintiff is totally erroneous."
Is ti correct that : " as per the settled principle of law, legal necessity need not be proved in case of sale or any transaction made by father/ manager " ?
