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

1938 Supreme(Mad) 240

Muthyala Ramachandrappa – Appellant
Versus
Muthyala Narayanappa – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. Appeal No. 189 of 1937. - This appeal arises out of a suit for partition between two brothers. The plaintiff is the second son of one Nagappa and defendant 1 is the elder son. Defendants 2 and 3 are the sons of defendant 1 and defendant 4 is the widow of Nagappa. Nagappa died in March 1921; and it is clear from the evidence that at his death, he left the family in very affluent circumstances. He was possessed of immovable properties of considerable value, of valuable jewels and of outstandings estimated at more than three lakhs of rupees, subject to payment of debts estimated at between Rs. 30,000 and Rs. 50,000. In the course of the evidence in this and the connected suits it has been suggested that out of the outstandings then due, considerable allowance must be made for bad debts ; but beyond the suggestion, there is little evidence to show what the extent of the bad debts might have been. The parties belong to the Vysia community; and for some generations at any rate the family has been carrying on trade. There has been some dispute as to the nature of the business carried on during Nagappas lifetime, particularly as to whether it included anything speculative; the m

















































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