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

1891 Supreme(Mad) 19

M.AYYAR, WILKINSON
Kunhikutti – Appellant
Versus
Achotti – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. As members of a Moplah family in North Malabar the plaintiffs claimed, with subsequent mesne profits, a moiety of certain items of property which, as they alleged, belonged to the joint family. The ninth and nineteenth defendants claimed, inter alia, item No. 40 under a koyi panom settlement of 1832. The value of the share claimed by plaintiffs was below Rs. 5,000, though the family property to be divided was of more than Rs. 5,000 value. The Subordinate Judge held that a koyi panom settlement of family property was subject to any arrangement which might be made at a future division and declined to exclude it from partible property. From this decision the ninth and nineteenth defendants appealed to the District Court, but the Acting District Judge returned the appeal for presentation to the High Court on the ground that the value of the subject-matter of the suit exceeded Rs. 5,000. From this order, the ninth and nineteenth defendants have preferred this second appeal, and have also presented Civil Revision Petition No. 406 of 1889 under Section 622 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Two questions arise for decision, viz., (i) whether the District Court had jurisdiction to




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