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

1973 Supreme(Mad) 54

P.S.KAILASAM, N.S.RAMASWAMI
Nabisha Begum – Appellant
Versus
Arumuga Thevar and others – Respondent


Advocates:
Thyagarajan, for Appellant.
K. Parasurama Iyer for R. Srinivasan, for Respondent.

Ramaswami, J.- The plaintiff, who lost before the trial Court, the first appellate Court as well as before Ramakrishnan, J., in second appeal, is the appellant before us in this Letters Patent Appeal. The suit is one for declaration and possession with future mesne profits in respect of certain lands which the plaintiff purchased from one Velayutham Pillai under the sale deed Exhibit A-1 dated 25th July, 1957. All the Courts have held that the plaintiff’s remedy, if any, is only a suit for general partition with an equity for having the suit properties allotted to the share of his vendor Velayutham Pillai inasmuch as, on the date of sale, he was not the owner of the suit properties but only bad a 1/3 share in the family properties including the suit properties and that the suit for possession of the specific properties should fail. The matter turns upon the effect of an order under Order 32, rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in a suit for partition in which a preliminary decree has already been passed, regarding the status of the members of the joint family. Whether the division in joint family status already brought about is nullified and the members restored to their status





























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