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

1933 Supreme(Mad) 266

RAMESAM
Sree Rajah Kakarlapudi Venkata Krishnamaraju Bahadur Garu – Appellant
Versus
Sree Rajah Chintalapudi Suryanarayana Raju Bahadur – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ramesam, J.

1. The suit out of which this second appeal arises was brought by six plaintiffs who are now the registered proprietors of Panduru Mallavaram estate against the Secretary of State for India in Council (defendant l) and defendants 2 and 3 who are owners of certain lands for an order directing the separate registration of the defendants land from the estate of Panduru Mallavaram. The villages of Panduru and Mallavaram were themselves originally part of the permanently settled estate of Uratla. In 1867 one Sagi Jagannadaraju became the proprietor of Uratla. In 1875 he granted these villages to his maternal uncle K. China Narasaraju by Ex. H-1 dated 7th April 1875. Portions of the estate passed by alienation to some of the present plaintiffs under Exs. P-F-4 dated 1917and 1925 respectively. These two villages were separatly registered in 1875 (vide Ex. A dated 11th December 1875). Ex. B is the proceedings of the Board of Revenue dated 15th September 1875 fixing the peishcush on the subdivided estate.

2. In 1852 certain lands in the village of Mallavaram, now in the possession of the contesting defendants, were alleged by them to have been given to one Pushpati Subadra





































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