S.NATARAJAN
Seethalakshmi Ammal and another – Appellant
Versus
Minor S. Ramesham (Rameshan) adopted S/o. Alwar alias Rukmani Ammal and Srinivasa Iyenger through next friend and property guardian C. K. S. Ranganathan and others – Respondent
2. The genesis of this unfortunate litigation between close relations was the posthumous adoption of the plaintiff as the son of the Srinivasa Iyengar who died on 6th September, 1961. Srinivasa Iyengar had no surviving male issue and had only three daughters of whom, the third respondent was the second, the other two being the appellants herein. It would appear that Srinivasa Iyengar was desirous of adopting the plaintiff even during his life time, but the parents of the plaintiff were initially reluctant to give the boy in adoption, for at that time, they had no other male issue besides the plaintiff. However, they were blessed with a second boy on 9th December, 1960 and thereafter they were willing to give the plaintiff in adoption, but due to the intervening illness o
Ram Charan v. Girja Nandini [1966] 1 S.C.J. 61; [1965] 3 S.C.R. 841; A.I.R. 966 S.C. 323
krishna Behari Lal v. Gulab Chand [1971] 1 S.C.J. 30; A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 1041
Pasungilia Pillai v. Isakkimuthu pillai A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 349
Ramaswami v. Venkatammal 77 L.W. 691; I.L.R. [1965] 1 Mad. 41; A.I.R. 1965 Mad. 193
Krishna Beharilal v. Gulabchand [1971] 1 S.C.J. 30; A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 1041
Narasimha Nayanevaru v. Ramalinga Rao : [1900] 10 M.L.J. 104
Tek Bahadur v. Debi Singh [1966] 2 S.C.J. 290; A.I.R. 1966 S.C. 292
Ramayammal v. Muthammal 87 L.W. 407; A.I.R. 1974 Mad. 321 : [1974] 2 M.L.J. 34
Venkatasubramania v. Srinivasan A.I.R. 1929 Mad. 670
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.