1946 Supreme(Mad) 101
SOMAYYA, YAHYA ALI
Thatha Amma alias Rugmani Amma & others – Appellant
Versus
Thankappa alias Madhava Mannadiar & others – Respondent
Advocates:
T. V. Muthukrishna Iyer, D. A. Krishna Variar, and Ravi Varma, for Appellant.
B. Sitarama Rao and K. P. Raman Menon, for Respondents.
Judgment:Plaintiffs appeal against the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Pakhat in O S. No. 29 of 1941. Though the suit is one for maintenance, the Questions that were tried in the Court below and which are to be decided here relate to the title of the contesting defendants to various properties which are claimed by them as their exclusive and separate properties. The quantum of maintenance depends on what the family properties are and for that purpose it has become necessary to decide whether the properties claimed by each defendant or each set of defendants are really his or their separate properties. The first plaintiff is the sister of the first defendant and the other plaintiffs are her children. The plaintiffs and defendants 1 to 16 are members of a tavazhi of which the first defendant is the karnavan. First plaintiff, defendants 1 to 6 and defendants 8, 9 and 10 are the children of their mother the 7th defendant. The 7th defendant and her children and grandchildren by the daughters are members of the tavazhi. As the eldest male member, the first defendant is the karnavan of the tavazhi.
There are thirteen items which are claimed in the plaint as being the family properties.
Click Here to Read the rest of this document