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

1955 Supreme(AP) 146

A.V.KRISHNA RAO, VISWANATHA SASTRY
MEDURI RAMA RAO – Appellant
Versus
MEDURI GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY – Respondent


VISWANATHA SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) "this is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decree in O. S. No. 108 of 1930 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada dismissing his suit for a declaration that the Resolution and decree of the Board of Revenue dated 6-4-1950 in V. O. S. A. No. 9 of 1949 was illegal, ultra vires and void. The Court below decided that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and this decision is challenged on appeal. The Madras Hereditary Village-Offices Act (III of 1895) will be referred to as " the Act" in this judgment. The facts are not in dispute and may be shortly stated. Rolupade is a proprietory village forming part of Nadim Tiruvur estate. The plaintiff s father Meduri Challayya was holding the office of headman and karnam of this village till 1910 when there was a bifurcation of the two offices. Challayya opted for the karnam s office and continued to retain it till 1927. In 1910, Nagabhushanam, a divided son of Challayya by his first wife, applied for and was appointed to the post of Village Headman of Rolupade, an office which he holds even now. When Challayya became old, he resigned the office of karnam on 6-8-1927 and his son by his second w



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