MOHAMMED AHMED ANSARI
Pasumarthi Peerayya – Appellant
Versus
Arvapalli Ramakrishnayya – Respondent
2. The following set of facts in the case are not in dispute. One Surynnarayana was the adoptive father of the plaintiff-respondent, and had purchased the land measuring 800 sq. yards. He died on Farwardi 23, 1345 F. (February 25, 1936), leaving behind a widow, Nagarathnamma, and Arvapalli Ramakrishnaiah the adopted son. While the adopted son was still a minor, having been bom on Thir 13, 1332 F. (March 19, 1923). the widow as his guardian sold 700 sq. yards of the property purchased by her husband to the appellant on Farwardi 22, 1349 F. (February 24, 1940).
The father-in-law of the adopted son started proceedings in Court for the appointment of the guardian of the person and property of the minor on Farward 25, 1349F. (February 27. 1940) and such guardian was appointed. The widow appealed to the High Court against the appointment of the guardian and filed a revision petition also. But during the pen
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.