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

1937 Supreme(Mad) 452

Manubolu Rangareddi – Appellant
Versus
Maramreddi Dasaradharami Reddi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The first respondent instituted a suit in the Court of the District Munsiff of Gudur for a declaration that he is the rightful holder of the office of headman either of the village of Gudur East or of Gudur West and that he is entitled to be appointed to one of these offices. These villages originally formed one village; but were converted into two in 1918. Before the division took place Gudur consisted of Gudur proper and five hamlets, namely, Vemulapalem, Veerareddi-pallee, Purittipalkm, Puthipallam and Divipalem. The headman of Gudur had jurisdiction over Gudur itself and the hamlets of Vemulapalem and Veerareddipallee, but there was an assistant headman appointed in respect of Purittipallam, Puthipallam and Divipalem. In 1908, the first respondents father was appointed headman of Gudur, Vemulapalem and Veerareddipallee, and held this office until 1912, when he resigned. The first respondents name was then registered with the Collector with a view to the first respondent being appointed in his fathers place on coming of age and the appellants father was appointed to discharge the duties of the office in the meantime. In 1905, the second respondents father was appointe


































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