SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1967 Supreme(SC) 331

J.M.SHELAT, S.M.SIKRI, J.C.SHAH
Kalidindi Venkata Subbaraju – Appellant
Versus
Chintalapati Subbaraju – Respondent


Advocates:
H.R.GOKHALE, M.S.K.Shastri, M.S.NARASIMHAN, R.Ganapathy Iyer, S.T.DESAI

Judgement

SHELAT, J.:- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and decree of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh confirming the dismissal by the trial Court of the suit filed by appellants 1 and 2.

2. The pedigree set out below clarifies the relationship between the parties -

3. Pullamraju died leaving him surviving his undivided son Somaraju, his widow Surayamma and three daughters. Somaraju died on March 29, 1921 whereupon the said Surayamma claimed that he had left a will dated March 26, 1921 whereunder all the properties had been bequeathed to her absolutely. Sitaramaraju the uncle of Pullamraju filed Suit No. 21 of 1923 for a declaration that Somaraju s will was not valid as he had executed, it when he was a minor and was not in a sound disposing state of mind. Surayamma in her written statement filed in that suit contended that Somaraju was a major having been born or January 7, 1903 and was in a sound disposing state of mind when he executed the said will. The suit ended in a compromise decree by which Sitaramaraju admitted that Somaraju was a major when he died, that he was in a sound disposing state of mind and that the will therefore was genuine and valid























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top