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

1939 Supreme(Mad) 225

KRISHNASWAMI AYYANGAR
Ramayya Goundan – Appellant
Versus
Kolanda Goundan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Krishnaswami Aiyangar, J.

1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for partition which was tried and decided by the Subordinate Judge of Salem. The appellant is one of four brothers and was admittedly entitled to a fourth share of the joint family properties. The only question in appeal is, what are the common properties movable and immovable which belonged to the joint family and liable to be divided between the appellant and his three brothers who are respondents 1 to 3 in the appeal? A decree for partition has been passed by the Subordinate Judge in respect of such only of the immovable properties as according to his finding formed the ancestral estate. The plaintiffs claim, however, extended further and covered items of properties standing in the names of the individual defendants as also monies outstanding in their names. As regards these items of properties and outstandings the learned Subordinate Judge held against the appellant and to that extent negatived his claim. Before us, the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant were confined to these disallowed items.

2. The admitted facts are these: The appellant and the three respondents are the sons of one Ka








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