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

1972 Supreme(Mad) 366

PALANISWAMY, ISMAIL
Kuppu Ramalingam Chettiar – Appellant
Versus
Ranganathan Chettiar – Respondent


Advocates:
S. Padmanabhan, for Appellant; M. Sundaram, for Respondents.

Judgement

PALANISWAMY, J. :- The unsuccessful plaintiff in the lower Court is the appellant. He sued for declaration of his right to be the trustee of the plaint-mentioned charities and to direct the defendant to deliver possession of the suit properties to him and also to render a true and correct account of the income of the properties. Except plaint item 6, the rest of the plaint-mentioned properties originally belonged to one Narasimha Chettiar, the ancestor of the plaintiff and the defendants. On 22-6-1899, Narasimha Chettiar created a trust over those properties specifying what charities should be performed and providing for the mode of devolution of the office of trusteeship. He had four sons (1) Venkatarama Chettiar, (2) Subbarayalu Chettiar (3) Govindaswami Chettiar and (4) Ananthapadhmanabhan. Of these four persons. No. 1, Venkatarama Chettiar predeceased his father. Defendants 2 and 3 are the grandsons of Venkatarama Chettiar. Defendants 8, 9 and 10 are the male descendants of Ananthapadmanabhan. The plaintiff is the eldest son of Govindaswami Chettiar. Defendants 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the male descendants of Subbarayalu Chettiar. On the death of Narasimha Chettiar, Subbar














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