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

1936 Supreme(Mad) 388

VARADACHARIAR
Sandanam Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Somasundaram Chettiar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Varadachariar, J.

1. This second appeal arises out of a suit to enforce a mortgage executed by defendants 1 and 2 in plaintiffs favour. The only question for determination in the second appeal is whether the first defendant was entitled to a share in four out of the mortgage items, namely, items 3 and 4 of Karur village and items 1 and 3 of Balambapuram village.

2. It has been found that the four items in question were acquired by the seventh defendant, the father of the mortgagors, in the years 1897, 1900, 1906 and 1908 in his own name, at a time when defendants 1 and 2 were minors. The seventh defendant contended that they were his self-acquired property and that the first defendant had no share therein which would pass under the mortgage. The first Court held that the first defendant had no interest in these items and passed a mortgage decree against the first defendants share in the other items comprised in the mortgage; but on appeal the learned District Judge held that these items, though acquired by the father, had not been kept separate by him as self-acquired property and that the first defendant was therefore entitled to a share therein, which must be held to have p






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