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

1925 Supreme(Mad) 238

V.RAO
Minor Palanivel – Appellant
Versus
Sivakami Ammal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The question that is raised by this appeal is whether in execution of a decree for mesne profits, the shares of the sons of the judgment-debtor, in the joint family property, are liable to be attached and sold. It is contended for the sons, that the obligation, recognised by the decree, is in respect of a debt, which it is not the pious duty of the sons, under the Hindu Law, to discharge.

2. In regard to the application of the rule enunciated in the ancient Hindu Law Texts, the Courts were confronted, from time to time, with great difficulty. The bare statement of the rule is simple enough. But it was found inadequate, when it had to be applied to different and various sets of facts. The result has been want of uniformity in the interpretations, as well as the application of the rule. The large body of case-law on the subject, will show that the Judges, while theoretically seeming to accept the rule itself, have had to decide each case, on grounds, as far as possible, of equity, justice and good conscience.

3. A very full, able and careful argument was addressed to us by Mr. Venkatasubramania Iyer, the learned Counsel for the appellants and he strongly



































































































































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