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

1921 Supreme(SC) 85

Nalam Pattabhiram Rao and others – Appellant
Versus
Mandavilli Narayanamoorthy and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Douglas Grant, Dube, De Gruyther

Sir Lawrence Jenkins. -

This is an appeal from a decree of the Madras High Court, dated the 17th January 1917, reversing a decree passed on the 24th July 1913, by the Temporary Subordinate Judge of Rajahmundry.

The Defendants Nos. 2 to 49 are members of a Hindu family known as the Nalam family. Their common ancestor was Nalam Bhimanna, who died in or about 1848, leaving seven sons and three daughters. The sons were Virayya, Venkanna, Ramanna, Vallabbaravudu, Pattabhiramanna, Subbayya, and Chalamayya. The daughters were Kamamma, Venkamma and Jaggamma.

The fifth of the sons, Pattabhiramanna, separated from his brothers in 1870. The Defendants Nos. 2 to 49 are the descendants of the six brothers who continued joint, and they are the Appellants in this appeal.

Kamamma married Mandavilli Butchi Kamanna, and the only child of that marriage was Peda Pattabhiramanna. He died in 1881, leaving an adopted son Chinna Pattabhiramayya, who died in 1895 without issue but survived by his widow, Mandavilli Seetharam. She is Defendant No. 1.

The original Plaintiff was Mandavilli Narayanamoorthy, a son of Mandavilli Butchi Kamanna by second marriage, and so a half-brother of Peda Pattabhiramanna. On his





























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