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

1984 Supreme(Mad) 1

S.NATARAJAN
M. Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
Ramaswami – Respondent


ORDER

S. Natarajan, J.

1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in the courts below is the appellant. The suit was for obtaining the reliefs of declaration of title and injunction.

2. The brief facts which require to be noticed are as under: The appellant and respondents 1 to 5 are brothers and the sixth respondent is their sister. All of them are the issues of the deceased Mari Mudaliar and the seventh respondent herein. Mari Mudaliar purchased the suit property of an extent of 4.79 acres under Exhibit A. 2 dated 18.4.51. He executed an unregistered will Exhibit A. 14 on 15.3.1965 bequeathing the suit property in favour of the appellant herein. Mari Mudaliar died in 1970, and after his death, the appellant claimed exclusive title to the suit property on the strength of the will.

3. Respondents 1 to 3 did not concede the genuineness of the will and the appellant's claim of exclusive title over the suit property. Respondents 4, 7 remained ex parte.

4. The principal defence of respondents 1 to 3 was that the suit property had been purchased from out of the income derived from the joint family properties and as such, the suit property constituted an item of joint family property and consequently 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