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

1927 Supreme(Mad) 91

(Tiruvadipuram) Lakshmi Kumara – Appellant
Versus
Palleti Chinna Narayanappa Naidu – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The plaintiff, the Poligar of Chettedi, is the appellant before us. His claim in this suit was for a declaration that the kanoha lands described in the plaint belong to him and for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from grazing cattle or trespassing thereon, or, in the alternative, for possession in case the defendants or any of them should claim to be in possession of the lands. The defendants set up in defence that they had an occupancy right in respect of the lands, that it was a customary right that was possessed by them of grazing cattle there on payment of Rs. 170 per fasli and that they further had the right of taking brushwood, etc., from the lands and also of cultivating portions of the lands. It must be observed that the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge is very unsatisfactory. He held that there was a customary right in the defendants to graze the cattle there on payment of Rs. 170 per annum and awarding to the plaintiff the rent in respect of two faslis dismissed the plaintiffs suit in other respects. The so-called customary right set up by the defendants appears on examination to be based merely on user of the lands for purposes of gr



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