NATESAN
Pichandi – Appellant
Versus
E. Ramaswami – Respondent
JUDGMENT :- This second appeal raises an interesting question in the Hindu law of inheritance, I should say pristine Hindu law. The suit is one for declaration of the plaintiff's title to the suit properties as the sole heir of one Athiadiyan and for recovery of possession of the same from the defendants. The appellants are defendants 3 and 4 and the legal representatives of deceased defendants 1 and 2. There were various defences to the action but now in second appeal they have crystallised into a question of law. The parties are governed by the Mitakshara system of Hindu law and the pedigree hereunder (Females underlined) gives the relationship of the parties. The suit properties had belonged to Neelan the common ancestor of Athiadiyan the propositus and the plaintiff. After Neelan, one half of the property was taken by Chinna Kannu, the father of the propositus and the other half by the plaintiffs maternal great grandfather. The suit is in respect of the half share that had devolved to Chinna Kannu. Chinna Kannu died leaving surviving the propositus his only son Adiadayan, and his widow Arumugha Valli. The suit properties devolved on Adiadiyan and when he died leaving h
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.