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

1975 Supreme(Mad) 157

NATARAJAN
R. Muthammal – Appellant
Versus
Narmada – Respondent


Advocates:
K.P. Sivasubramaniam, for Petitioner; P.S. Srisailam and K. Venugopal, for Respondents; N. Thyagarajan for Addl. Govt. Pleader, for the State.

Judgement

ORDER:- The plaintiff in O. S. 138 of 1972 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Erode, who has been called upon to pay additional court-fee of Rs. 4499-50, has preferred this revision petition to canvass the propriety of the order.

2. With regard to the properties of one Rangaswami Naidu, there was a partition suit in O.S. 134 of 1969 to which the members of the family of Rangaswami Naidu were parties. Rangaswami Naidu had two sons of whom one Venkataswami Naidu was the second. In the partition suit, not only Venkataswami Naidu, but his son, the 9th defendant in present suit, were made parties. Ultimately, the suit was compromised on 9-7-1969 and a compromise decree was passed in the suit under the terms of which, the A schedule properties in the present suit were given to Venkataswami and his minor son, and in addition, the B Schedule property herein was given to the minor to be enjoyed by him absolutely. In the present suit, the plaintiff who is the widow of Rangaswami Naidu, claims that subsequent to the compromise decree she came to know through her son Venkataswami that he had already been married to one Janaki and as such Venkataswami's marriage with the














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