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

Sisili Ammal – Appellant
Versus
I. S. Sundararaja Naidu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The question raised in these appeals relates to the nature and effect of the grant under the Original of Ex. D-1.

2. Two suits were filed in the Lower Court, O.S. No. 13 of 1942 and O.S. No. 17 of 1942. The judgment under appeal refers to the array of the parties in the later suit and we shall do the same.

3. The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 17 of 1942 filed the suit for a declaration that the usufructuary mortgage held by them under Ex. P-1 over the village of Irungattu-kottai is valid and binding on the defendants 1 to 5. The mortgagors are the first defendant, second defendant and Sriramulu Naidu, the father of defendants 3, 4 and 5. The other suit O.S. No. 13 of 1942 was filed by the sons of Sriramulu Naidu against the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 17 of 1942 for an account of their one-third share in the income realised from the suit village on the footing that the document executed by their father Sriramulu and his two brothers is not binding on them. The two suits raise substantially the same question. The lower Court decreed O.S. No. 13 of 1942. O.S. No. 17 of 1942 was decreed against defendants 1 and 2 and they do not appeal. It was dismissed against defendants 3 to 5 who are






















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