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

1993 Supreme(AP) 39

M.N.RAO, A.GOPAL RAO
B. Janardhan Gupta (died) – Appellant
Versus
B. Padmanabha Gupta – Respondent


A. GOPAL RAO, J.

( 1 ) PLAINTIFF is the appellant in this appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, plaintiff died and his son was brought on record as his legal representative.

( 2 ) FOR convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

( 3 ) THE suit was filed for (a) partition and separate possession of plaintiff s one-half share in the plaint, a and b schedule properties and (b) directing the defendant to render a full and detailed account of the income from the plaint schedule properties.

( 4 ) PLAINT a schedule consists of immoveable properties and plaint b schedule consists of rice mill, electric motor, starter, items of machinery and furniture in the rice mill.

( 5 ) THE case of the plaintiff, as per the averments in the plaint is :- The defendant is his younger brother. Their father, Eswaraiah, was doing a petty business at the time of his death. Plaintiff and defendant were members of a joint Hindu Family. The defendant was a minor at that time and he was brought up by the plaintiff till he attained majority. Plaintiff started his own business with M/s. Volkart Brothers as a broker in the year 1928 and continued that business till 1930


























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