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

1940 Supreme(Mad) 101

VENKATARAMANA RAO
Boganatham Arunachalam Chetty – Appellant
Versus
Boganatham Krishnaveni Ammal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. This appeal and the memorandum of objections arise out of a suit filed by the plaintiffs as reversioners of the estate of one Kumaraswami Chetti for restraining the first defendant, the mother of the said Kumaraswami Chetti from committing waste of the property inherited by her from her son. The first plaintiff was related to the said Kumaraswami as his great grandfathers brothers son. Plain-tiffs 2 and 3 are the sons of the deceased brothers of the first plaintiff. The first plaintiff died during the pendency of the suit in the lower Court and plaintiffs 2 and 3 were declared as his legal representatives. The second defendant Subbammal is the grandmother of the deceased Kumaraswami Chetti being his fathers fathers wife. The third defendant is the wife of Kumaraswamis great grandfather. Defendants 2 and 3 are admittedly persons entitled to maintenance out of the estate of Kumaraswami. In the plaint the plaintiff alleged that the first defendant was entirely in the hands of her lather, one Muthukrishna Chettiar, that the bulk of the property was moveable property, being fixed deposits in Banks and that the conduct of the widow was such as to raise a r









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