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

1959 Supreme(Mad) 337

RAJAGOPALAN, RAMACHANDRA.IYER
Sellappa Goundan – Appellant
Versus
A. Bhaskaran – Respondent


Advocates:
R. Ramamurthi, for Apoellants.
V. Vedantachari and R. Mohan, for Respondents.

Ramachandra Iyer, J.-

This appeal arises out of an order passed by the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Vellore, in O.A. No. 18 of 1958, declaring that the inam village of Komarapalayam in Tiruchengode Taluk of Salem District is not an estate within the meaning of section 3 (2) (d) of the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908.

The appellants claim to be ryots in the village. Alleging that they were only holding under a lease which had expired, the inamdars filed O.S. No. 62 of 1955 in the District Munsif’s Court, Sankari at Salem, for eviction and allied reliefs. The appellants resisted the claim of the inamdars pleading that they were entitled to occupancy rights in the lands as the village of Komarapalayam was an estate, and that the lands held by them were ryoti. While the suit was pending, respondents 1 and 2, two out of five co-sharer inamdars of the village, filed an application under section 3 (1) of Madras Act XXX of 1956 before the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Vellore, for a declaration that Komarapalayam village was not an estate as defined’ by section 3 (2) of Madras Act I of 1908. The appellants, however, were not made parties to the application, the 1st respondent herein, the State o









































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