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

1949 Supreme(Mad) 205

SATYANARAYANA RAO, VISWANATHA SASTRI
Subba Naicker – Appellant
Versus
Nallammal – Respondent


Advocates:
S.V. Venugopalachari and V. Meenakshisundaram for Appellant.
V. Ramaswami Aiyar for Respondents.

Judgment

Satyanarayana Rao, J.-This is an appeal by the first defendant against the preliminary decree for partition passed by the learned Subordinate Judge in O.S. No. 24 of 1943. It is unnecessary to set out the facts of the case elaborately and it will be sufficient to confine the facts in so far as they are relevant to the disposal of the contentions that have been raised in this appeal. The first defendant and one Krishnaswami Naicker were brothers being members of an undivided Hindu joint family. The family owned properties specified in the various schedules attached to the plaint. Krishnaswami Naicker died in June, 1942, leaving behind him the plaintiff, his widow and an unmarried daughter, the second defendant. The widow instituted the present suit for partition and separate possession of a half share in the family properties basing her claim on the rights conferred upon her by the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act, 1937. It has now been finally decided by the Federal Court that this Act as it then stood does not operate to regulate succession to agricultural land in the Governors’ Provinces and also that it does not operate to regulate devolution by survivorship of such







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