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

1936 Supreme(Mad) 102

VARADACHARIAR
Moravaneni Veerayya – Appellant
Versus
Sree Raja Bommadevara Venkata Bhashyakaralarao Bahadur – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Varadachariar, J.

1. This is an appeal by the defendants against a decree which directed them to hand over possession to the plaintiff of the suit lands and pay mesne profits. The defendants right to possession rests upon Ex. K, a patta dated 31st October 1923, granted to them by the plaintiffs father. The plaintiff contends that the suit lands have been allotted to him at a partition between himself and his father and that the patta whereby, after the preliminary decree in the partition suit, the father has granted permanent occupancy rights to the defendants in what till then were homefarm lands of the estate is not binding on him. It is therefore necessary to investigate the circumstances under which this patta was granted. Plaintiffs father was the zamindar of South Vellore and in 1920 a suit for partition was instituted against the father by the plaintiffs mother acting as next friend. Allegations of gross mismanagement were made against the father and were more than justified. A preliminary decree was passed on 3rd March 1921 (Ex. J). It was the result of a compromise and its terms show that the persons who brought it about were anxious as far as possible not unnecessa






















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