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

1949 Supreme(Mad) 163

GOVINDA MENON
Venkataswami Naidu – Appellant
Versus
Muniappa Mudaliar – Respondent


Advocates:
K.S. Desikan for Appellants.
N.C. Vijayaraghavachari and N.C. Srinivasan for Respondents.

JUDGMENT

The learned Additional District Judge of Salem, disagreeing with the decision of the District Munsiff of Sankaridrug at Salem, held in A.S. No. 395 of 1943 out of which this second appeal arises, that Ex. P-1, dated 26th December, 1931, related to the purchase of the suit property in the name of the plaintiffs’ vendor not as benami for the first defendant but in order to enure for the benefit of the plaintiffs’ vendor himself. Ex. P-1 was a sale deed for a consideration of Rs. 800 executed by one Muthuswami Konar in favour of one Duraiswami Naidu, by which the property mentioned therein was sold with absolute rights to the latter. On 7th June, 1941, Duraiswami Naidu sold the property purchased under Ex. P-1 to the plaintiffs for a sum of Rs. 1,500. On the strength of this purchase under Ex. P-12, the plaintiffs brought the suit for a declaration of their title to the suit house and possession of the same with damages for past use and occupation from the defendants. The first defendant who was the brother of defendants 2 and 3 contested the plaintiffs’ claim on the ground that the purchase under Ex. P-1 was for his own benefit and that he paid the consideration for it though






















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