• Today: October 31, 2025

Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma (AIR 1968 SC 1042)

31 October, 2025
101
Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma (AIR 1968 SC 1042) — Minor’s Partition Right | The Law Easy

Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma (AIR 1968 SC 1042)

Minor’s right to demand partition under Mitakshara and severance in status through a suit by next friend.

Supreme Court of India 1968 AIR 1968 SC 1042 Hindu Joint Family ~6 min read
Mitakshara Minor’s partition suit Severance in status
Illustration for Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma on minor’s partition right
```
Author: Gulzar Hashmi  |  Location: India  |  Published: 31 Oct 2025
```
```

Quick Summary

CASE_TITLE Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma, AIR 1968 SC 1042

The Supreme Court said a suit for partition filed on behalf of a minor can split the family status, just like a suit by an adult—if the court finds it helps the minor. Under Mitakshara, the right begins at birth and includes the right to demand partition.

Judgment overview graphic for Kakumanu Pedasubhayya v. Kakumanu Akkamma

Issues

  • Do adult and minor plaintiffs stand on the same footing when filing a partition suit?

Rules

Mitakshara Birthright

In a Mitakshara family, a coparcener’s right arises at birth. This right carries: (i) maintenance from joint property, (ii) a right to partition, and (iii) separate possession when demanded.

Minor’s Suit

A suit filed by a next friend for a minor can sever status if the court finds it beneficial to the minor.

Timeline visual: minor’s partition suit and severance in status

Facts (Timeline)

Suit Filed: A next friend filed a partition suit for a Hindu minor to divide joint family property.

Death During Suit: The minor died while the case was pending. His mother stepped in as legal representative and continued as second plaintiff.

Trial Result: The court found defendants acted against the minor’s interests. Partition was beneficial and a decree was granted.

Appeal Argument: Appellants said the suit had abated because the minor died before the court decided whether the suit benefited him.

Arguments

Appellants

  • Suit abated due to minor’s death before decision on benefit.
  • A minor cannot clearly express intention to divide, unlike an adult.

Respondents

  • Next friend can sue; court can test benefit to the minor.
  • Defendants acted against minor’s interests; partition decree should stand.

Judgment

The Supreme Court rejected the abatement argument. It held that a suit by a next friend on a minor’s behalf brings about severance in status as effectively as a suit by an adult—provided the court finds it beneficial to the minor. Here, benefit was proved; the decree remained.

When the law permits a person interested to act for a minor, a declaration to become divided made on his behalf causes severance in status, subject to the court’s finding of benefit.

Ratio Decidendi

Effect, not age, controls severance: A minor’s partition suit via next friend does sever status if it is beneficial. Mitakshara birthright supports that remedy.

Why It Matters

  • Aligns minor with adult in effect for partition suits.
  • Protects minors from hostile management of joint property.
  • Clarifies that benefit to the minor is the key check.

Key Takeaways

  1. Mitakshara: coparcenary right starts at birth.
  2. Next friend can sue for partition on a minor’s behalf.
  3. Severance in status occurs if the suit is beneficial.
  4. Death of minor does not abate suit if L.R. continues and benefit is shown.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: MINOR-SEV-BENEFITMinor suit → Severance → Court checks Benefit.

  1. File by next friend for the minor.
  2. Show how partition helps the minor.
  3. Result: severance in status if benefit is proved.

IRAC Outline

Issue: Are adult and minor plaintiffs on the same footing in partition suits?

Rule: Under Mitakshara, right at birth includes right to partition; a next-friend suit can sever status if beneficial to the minor.

Application: Defendants acted against the minor. Suit was beneficial. Mother continued as L.R. after the minor’s death.

Conclusion: Minor’s suit via next friend effects severance like an adult’s suit; decree upheld.

Glossary

Coparcener
A member of the joint family with a birthright in property.
Next Friend
A person who files or conducts a suit on behalf of a minor.
Severance in Status
Legal split of joint status, even before physical division of property.
Mitakshara
A school of Hindu law governing joint family property in most of India.

FAQs

Yes. Through a next friend. If the court sees benefit, the suit causes severance in status.

Not necessarily. A legal representative can continue. If benefit is shown, the decree can stand.

That partition is beneficial to the minor—e.g., protection from hostile acts or mismanagement.

A minor need not personally express it. The next friend’s declaration in the suit is enough, subject to court’s approval.

Page Metadata

  • PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Mitakshara; minor partition suit; severance in status; coparcenary; Hindu joint family
  • SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: next friend; legal representative; abatement; maintenance; separate possession
  • PUBLISH_DATE: 31 Oct 2025
  • AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi
  • LOCATION: India
```
Reviewed by The Law Easy
Hindu Law Coparcenary Supreme Court

Comment

Nothing for now