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

1925 Supreme(Mad) 665

K.SASTRI
O. Ranganatha Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
A. Mohanakrishna Mudaliar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kumaraswami Sastri, J.

1. The only question argued in this appeal is whether the gift to the daughter of the testator of the house mentioned in the plaint conferred on her a vested interest in the property or merely a contingent interest. The testator had three daughters and two sons. Here we are concerned only with the gift to the eldest daughter Kuppammal. The Will of the testator was probated and marked as Ex. A. The testator appoints certain executors under the Will; he specifies the property which he has got and makes certain bequests to his daughters. Paragraph 17 of the Will is the paragraph relating to the house in question. In that he states as follows:

Of my three daughters, at the time of the marriage of my eldest daughter, Sowbagiavathi Kuppammal, jewels for about Rs. 2,000 should be given and Rs. 1,000 spent for marriage, and after the debt has been cleared, besides giving ar streedhanam, House No. 3, Arunachellam Pillas Lane, Periamet, mentioned in para. 1, womans cloths costing from Rs. 3-8-0 to Rs. 7 should be purchased and given to all our relatives, who are poor and who have come for the marriage.

2. At the date of the death of the testator there was a mortga















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