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

1990 Supreme(SC) 646

M.M.PUNCHHI, S.C.AGRAWAL
Munisami Naidu – Appellant
Versus
C. Ranganathan – Respondent


JUDGMENT:— This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and decree dated 17-12-75 of the High Court of Madras in Second Appeal No. 1835 of 1974.

2. The suit property is a piece of agricultural land. It fell to be settled on Saradammal under a Compromise Decree dated 24-7-1963 between her and other members of a joint family. Having acquired title thereto, she executed a registered Lease Deed in favour of the appellant on 2-8-1963 conferring on him a tenure of five years. During the course thereof, as it appears, on 14-9-1966 she settled the holding in favour of her brother, the respondent herein, but by a deed which was not registered. On 1-8-1967, Saradammal died. On 4-9-1968, the respondent sent a notice to the appellant asking him to pay the arrears of rent but the notice was not responded to. Finally, on 13-9-69, the respondent filed the present suit seeking arrears of rent and eviction from the suit property.

3. The defence of the appellant was that he was not aware of the settlement deed of Saradammal in favour of the respondent and which he described to have been executed in secrecy. The case further pleaded was that he was not aware as to whom he had to pay rent but he










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