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

1938 Supreme(Mad) 298

VARADACHARIAR
Kaza Parandhamayya – Appellant
Versus
Surapaneni Veerayya – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Varadachariar, J.

1. This second appeal arises out of an application filed by the third defendant in the suit, objecting to the sale of certain properties at the instance of the plaintiff who had obtained a decree against the fourth defendant in the suit. The suit had been instituted against three defendants of whom the first defendant and the third defendant were the sons of the second defendant. As the first defendant died pending the suit his son the fourth defendant was added as his legal representative. Defendants 2 and 3 contended that the debt incurred by the first defendant was a personal debt of his and that they and their interests in the joint family property could not be held liable therefor. The case went to arbitration and a decree passed in terms of the award held that only the one-third share which the fourth defendant (as the son of the first defendant) had in the joint family property was liable for the suit debt. Defendants 2 and 3 were exonerated. It is the attempt of the plaintiff to bring the fourth defendants one-third share to sale that is now contested by the application under appeal.

2. At the outset, we would observe that the applicant has, in our o


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