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

1925 Supreme(Mad) 610

Sooppiadath Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
Irimbantakath Manha Mammad Kunhi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The plaintiff-appellant brings this suit for the recovery of an elephant and also certain documents in the possession of the defendants. The defendants are the children and the wives of one Moossankutty, the deceased younger brother of the plaintiff. The plaintiff bases his claim as karnavan of the tavazhi consisting of the children of one Asya, the mother of the plaintiff and Moossankutty and it is alleged that Moossankutty bought this elephant out of tavazhi property and consequently the karnavan is now entitled to possession. As regards the documents it is said that they relate to tavazhi property and that the plaintiff is the proper custodian.

2. The first argument advanced in appeal is with reference to the procedure adopted in the lower Court. The Subordinate Judge stated that the nature of certain properties situated in Chandranalloor was not in issue in the suit and he would not allow any further questions to be asked as to whether they were tavazhi properties or not. It is now stated that not only was oral evidence excluded but also documentary evidence. The plaintiff has filed a list of documents which he said were so excluded. When the Subordinate Judge gave th

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