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

1983 Supreme(Mad) 228

SINGARAVELU
Margabandhu – Appellant
Versus
Kothandarama Mandhiri – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Margabandhu and A. Doraiswami, for Appellants, M. N. Padmanabhan and V. Srinivasan, for Respondents.

Judgement

JUDGMENT :- Plaintiffs 2 and 3 in suit are the appellants herein. They are the children of the first plaintiff, who is the wife of the first defendant. According to the plaintiffs, the second defendant is the concubine of the first defendant and defendants 3 to 6 are the children through the second defendant. The suit was laid by the mother and her two children for maintenance of the first plaintiff and for partition and separate possession of 2/3rd share belonging to plaintiffs 2 and 3.

2. The first defendant resisted the suit contending that the second defendant is not his concubine, but a lawfully wedded wife. Therefore, defendants 3 to 6 are the legitimate heirs of the first defendant along with plaintiffs 2 and 3. Thus, the plaintiffs 2 and 3 will be entitled each to 1/5th share. The claim for maintenance is resisted on the ground of voluntary desertion.

3. On these contentions, the trial Court found that the plaintiffs 2 and 3 are entitled to partition and separate possession of their two-third share in the suit properties. A decree for maintenance was granted to the first plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 30/- per month from the date of actual partition after the passing o







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