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

1966 Supreme(Mad) 78

NATESAN
Rajalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Minor Ramachandran – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Gopalaswami Iyengar, for Appellants; P. S. Srisailam, for Respondents.

JUDGMENT :- The defendants in a suit for declaration of title to properties and possession of the same with claim for mesne profits, are the appellants in this second appeal. The facts relevant and material for the second appeal may be briefly set out.

2. The suit properties originally belonged to one Anjalai Animal, wife of Arumugha Padayachi, the putative father of the plaintiffs in the suit. They are the children of Arumugha Padayachi by his concubine Marimuthu Animal. Anjalai Ammal having no male issue, under the deed of settlement Ex. A. 1 dated 25-10-1955, settled the suit properties on the minor plaintiffs. The deed of settlement refers to Arumugha Padayachi as their protector, father and guardian, and it is recited therein that the properties which had been settled on them are on their behalf placed in possession of their guardian, the said Arumugha Padayachi. Certain conditions are imposed under the deed enjoining the settles to maintain Arumugha Padayachi during his lifetime, the properties to be taken by the plaintiffs after his lifetime, with absolute rights. A charge is provided in favour of Arumugha Padayachi for his maintenance. The settlement deed referring to a mort

























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